VICTORIAN  ERr 


N  reviv:a 


VI 


Ijl  n  III  m^n  >jiiii       I • •      ••  ■     - 


tCbe  Victotian  £ca  Settee 


The  Anglican  Revival 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.archive.org/details/democracychristiOOcarnricli 


The  Anglican 
Revival 


By 


J.  H.  OVERTON,  D.D. 

Rector  of  Epworth  and  Canon  of  Lincoln;  author  of 

'The  English  Church  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1800-1833)' 

"Life  of  John  Wesley",  &c.  &c. 


HERBERT  S.  STONE  &  COMPANY 

CHICAGO  &   NEW  YORK 

M  DCCC  XCVIII 


^>r^ 


Preface 


The  object  of  the  following  pages  is  to  give  a  brief 
sketch  of  that  Revival  in  the  English  Church  which  has 
been  a  marked  feature  of  the  Victorian  Era.  In  one 
sense,  indeed,  it  dates  from  the  reign  of  William  IV., 
for  it  began  with  the  Oxford  Movement  of  1833;  but 
that  movement  was  only  just  beginning  to  make  itself 
generally  felt  when  Queen  Victoria  ascended  the  throne; 
so  the  Revival  may  with  the  strictest  propriety  be  said 
to  belong  to  the  Victorian  period.  "The  Anglican 
Revival"  and  *'The  Oxford  Movement"  are  by  no 
means  convertible  terms;  if  they  were,  the  present 
sketch  would  be  superfluous,  for  the  Oxford  movement 
has  been  handled  by  many  pens;  but  there  is  not,  so 
far  as  I  am  aware,  any  one  single  volume  which  gives  a 
succinct  account  of  the  Anglican  Revival.  That  revival 
owes  a  considerable  part  of  its  success  to  men  who 
never  came  under  the  spell  of  the  Oxford  school,  who 
carefully  guarded  themselves  from  being  identified  with 
it,  and  who,  on  occasions,  were  brought  into  collision 
with  it.  The  Oxford  Movement  undoubtedly  gave  the 
first  and  most  effective  impulse  to  the  revival,  and  its 
leaders   claim   the  first   place   in  any  account  of  that 

248923 


vi  Preface 

revival;  but  when  the  Oxford  Movement  suffered  a 
partial  collapse  in  the  place  of  its  birth  in  1845,  the 
Anglican  Revival  hardly  received  a  check  in  its  onward 
course.  This  will  appear  in  detail  in  the  present  little 
work,  which,  though  written  by  one  who  necessarily 
regarded  the  subject  from  the  clerical  point  of  view,  has 
had  the  great  advantage  of  passing  through  the  crucible 
of  a  competent  lay  criticism.  Mr.  J.  Holland  Rose,  the 
editor  of  the  series,  has  carefully  examined  and  freely 
criticised  every  part  of  it,  and  I  desire  thus  publicly  to 
express  my  deep  obligation  to  him  for  his  invaluable 
aid. 

J.   H.  O. 

November  y  1897. 


Contents 


CHAPTER   I 

Page 

Introductory         --------p 

CHAPTER  // 
First  Stage  of  the  Movement  (18S3-183S)    -        -        '    27 

CHAPTER  III 
Second  Stage  of  the  Movement  (i835-i8jg)         -        -62 

CHAPTER  IV 
Third  Stage  0/ the  Movement  (1839-184^)  '        -        -    88 

CHAPTER  V 
Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession         -        -        -        -  121 

CHAPTER  VI 
Cambridge  and  the  Movement 13^ 

CHAPTER    VII 

The  Movement  in  the  Outer  World— Dean  Hook  and 
Bishop  Wilberforce 146 

CHAPTER    VIII 

The  Hampden  and  Gorham  Cases  and  their  results      -  167 

CHAPTER  IX 

The  Movement  and  Public  Worship    -        -        -        -  188 

CHAPTER  X 
Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement         -        -        -211 

INDEX 225 


The  Anglican  Revival. 


Chapter  I, 
Introductory. 

In  the  period  immediately  preceding  the  Oxford 
Movement  there  was  great  bitterness  in  many  quar- 
ters against  the  Church  of  England,  and  it  was 
seriously  thought,  both  by  friends  and  foes,  that 
her  days  as  a  national  church  were  numbered. 
The  repeal  of  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  in 
1828,  the  Catholic  Emancipation  Act  of  1829,  and 
the  Reform  Act  of  1832  were  regarded  by  many  as 
anti-church  measures.  Itwas  expected  that  the  besom 
of  reform,  having  commenced  its  work  in  the  state, 
was  now  to  be  employed  in  cleansing  the  Augean 
stable  of  the  church.  The  church  herself  seemed 
almost  inclined  to  accept  the  inevitable,  and  to  be 
preparing  **to  wrap  her  robes  around  her  and  die 
gracefully ".  She  was  quite  ready  to  reform  her 
real  abuses,  if  she  could  do  so  without  playing  into 
the  hands  of  her  foes.  In  fact,  she  had  begun,  for 
thirty  years  or  more,  to  reform  herself.  There  was 
infinitely  more  life  and  vigour  in  her  at  the  time  of 
the  Reform  Bill  than  there  had  been  at  the  close  of 


lo  The  Anglican  Revival. 

the  eighteenth  century.  It  is  perfectly  wonderful 
to  observe  how  many  new  agencies  for  good  had 
been  set  on  foot  by  her,  and  what  fresh  vitality  had 
been  given  by  her  to  old  ones  in  the  interval.  The 
Church  Missionary  Society,  founded  in  1799,  was 
making  great  progress  in  Africa  and  the  East,  and 
also  in  India.  New  life  had  been  given  to  the  older 
societies,  both  to  the  Society  for  Promoting  Christian 
Knowledge  and  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of 
the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts.  The  National  Society 
for  the  education  of  the  poor  was  founded  in  181 2  on 
the  principle  that  **the  national  religion  should  be 
made  the  ground-work  of  national  education"  (hence 
the  name),  and  was  prospering  and  extending  its 
operations  beyond  the  most  sanguine  expectations 
of  its  friends.  The  Indian  episcopate,  which  at  the 
outset  met  with  great  opposition,  was  at  last  firmly 
established,  and  gave  a  great  impetus  to  mission 
work  in  India.  The  Church  Building  Society, 
founded  in  181 8,  met  half-way  the  great  liberality 
of  the  state,  and  it  is  computed  that,  between  par- 
liamentary grants,  the  work  of  this  society,  and 
individual  efforts,  a  sum  of  not  less  than  six  millions 
of  pounds  was  spent  in  the  building  and  reparation 
of  churches  from  1818  to  1833, — that  is,  far  more 
than  in  the  hundred  years  preceding  18 18. 

And  yet  the  church  found  that  the  more  active 
she  was,  the  more  unpopular  she  became.  The 
state  of  things  was  quite  different  from  what  it  had 
been  a  hundred  years  before,  when  the  trumpet- 


Introductory.  ii 

tongue  of  Wesley  began  to  rouse  the  slumbering 
church  from  her  lethargy.  Then^  from  a  number 
of  circumstances  which  this  is  not  the  place  to  par- 
ticularize, the  church  had  undoubtedly  sunk  to  a 
very  low  ebb  as  a  spiritual,  though  not  as  an  intel- 
lectual, force;  but  this  could  not  fairly  be  said  now. 
The  abuses  which  led  to  the  Evangelical  Revival 
are  obvious  enough ;  but  these  abuses,  if  not  entirely 
removed,  were  certainly  far  less  glaring  when  the 
outcry  against  the  church  reached  its  climax  about 
the  year  1832.  The  English  people  are  not  unjust, 
and  it  seems  at  the  first  blush  unaccountable  that 
the  church  should  have  reached  the  height  of  her 
unpopularity  just  at  a  time  when  she  was,  in  one 
sense,  singularly  fruitful  in  good  works.  But  those 
who  penetrate  beneath  the  surface  will  find  an  easy 
explanation  of  the  anomaly  by  two  considerations : 

(i)  The  odium  against  the  church  was  more  appa- 
rent than  real ;  its  expression  proceeded  from  a  noisy 
minority,  not  from  the  quiet  majority.  When  the 
question  was  fairly  put  to  the  bulk  of  the  nation, 
**Are  you,  or  are  you  not,  attached  to  the  church 
of  your  fathers?  do  you,  or  do  you  not,  wish  to 
see  it  weakened,  and,  if  possible,  destroyed?",  to 
the  surprise  even  of  those  who  put  it  the  answer 
came,  *'Yes,  we  are  attached  to  it;  and  we  will 
maintain  it  to  the  last  gasp  I" 

(2)  The  activity  of  the  church  mainly  proceeded 
from  one  or  the  other  of  two  parties,  which,  both 
together,  constituted  only  a  very  small  proportion 


13  The  Anglican  Revival. 

of  the  whole  body.  These  parties  were  called  respec- 
tively **the  Evangelicals"  and  **the  orthodox".  The 
Evangelicals  were  then  undoubtedly  the  strongest 
spiritual  force  in  the  church ;  so  much  so  that  when 
a  person  was  spoken  of  as  '^a  serious"  or  ** a  re- 
ligious "  person,  it  meant  practically  that  he  was  an 
Evangelical.  But  the  Evangelicals  were  essentially 
a  party  within  the  church,  not  a  leaven  leavening 
the  whole  body.  And  if,  on  the  one  hand,  they 
exercised  an  attractive,  on  the  other  hand  they  cer- 
tainly exercised  a  repulsive  power;  and  that,  not 
only  among  mere  worldlings,  but  also  among  very 
many  who  were  by  no  means  deficient  in  spiritual 
earnestness.  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  the  whole 
current  of  that  literary  outburst  of  poetry  and  prose, 
which  is  so  remarkable  a  feature  of  the  early  nine- 
teenth century,  and  which  had  been  quite  unparal- 
lelled  since  the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  set  against 
the  Evangelicals.  Not  one  of  the  really  great  writers 
who  have  shed  an  immortal  lustre  upon  the  period 
had  the  least  sympathy  with  Evangelicalism ;  while 
some  of  them  wrote  directly  against  it.  Those  again 
who  made  theology  their  special  study  were  dis- 
satisfied with  the  thinness  of  the  theology  of  the 
Evangelicals;  while  men  of  the  world,  in  the  good 
as  well  as  in  the  bad  sense  of  that  term,  revolted 
against  the  narrow  and  rather  arbitrary  restrictions 
and  distinctions  which  they  made.  Hence  scant 
justice  was  done,  outside  their  own  circle,  to  their 
truly  saintly  characters  and  the  excellent  practical 


Introductory.  13 

work  which  they  did,  of  which  their  share  in  the 
abolition  of  the  slave-trade  is  only  one  out  of  many 
instances. 

The  other  party,  which  must  be  credited  with  a 
very  large  share  of  the  church  activity  of  the  period, 
was  that  of  ''the  orthodox";  but  these  formed  a 
smaller  and  less  widely  influential  party  than  the 
Evangelicals.  They  were  the  best  representatives 
of  the  old  High  Church  divines,  who  have  always 
been  the  backbone  of  the  Church  of  England ;  and 
of  their  practical  energy  in  all  kinds  of  religious 
and  philanthropic  work  we  are  reaping  the  benefit 
to  this  very  day.  But  their  influence  was  not  widely 
extended ;  they  moved  within  their  own  circle,  and 
those  outside  that  circle  gave,  at  most,  *'an  otiose 
assent "  (to  use  a  pregnant  phrase  of  Bishop  Butler) 
to  their  proceedings.  Outsiders  respected  them — 
at  a  distance — as  ''sound  churchmen  "  (which  they 
were),  but  were  not  roused  to  any  enthusiasm  by 
their  efforts. 

The  names  given  to  these  two  parties  respectively, 
"the  Clapham  sect"  and  "the  Clapton  sect",  derived 
from  their  two  chief  centres,  indicate  correctly  enough 
their  weakness.  Not  that  either  of  them  formed,  or 
desired  to  form,  anything  that  could  be  rightly  termed 
"a  sect";  for  neither  of  them  followed  any  one 
leader;  they  were  quite  content  to  be  simply  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  of  England;  but  both  were 
coteries  within  the  church,  and  rather  limited  cot- 
eries too. 


14  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Outside  both  were  the  vast  majority  of  church- 
men, both  lay  and  clerical,  whose  church  principles 
were  of  the  vaguest  possible  description.  The 
Methodists  knew  what  they  meant,  and  the  Roman 
Catholics  knew  what  they  meant;  but,  with  the 
exception  of  the  two  parties  which  have  been  noted, 
churchmen  of  this  period  seem  to  have  had  no  defi- 
nite system  of  doctrine  or  worship.  It  is  difficult  to 
say  what  their  opinions  were — they  had  none  that 
could  be  put  into  any  tangible  shape.  If  they  were 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  any  perfervid  Evangelical, 
they  yielded  passively  to  his — or  perhaps  her — in- 
fluence, rather  on  the  principle  of  *' anything  for  a 
quiet  life"  than  from  conviction;  if  they  were  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  *Hhe  orthodox",  they  would 
be  quite  content  to  be  reckoned  among  **  church 
and  king"  men,  and  would  back  up  their  many 
schemes  for  good  with  their  purses  and  the  sanction 
of  their  names;  the  best  of  them  were  amiable  but 
not  impressive. 

In  short,  the  church  as  a  whole  was  wanting  in 
definiteness  of  doctrine  and  purpose  during  the  first 
thirty  years  of  the  nineteenth  century.  But  all  the 
time  there  were  elements  at  work  which  were  leaven- 
ing the  mass  gradually.  The  revival  which  is  here 
to  be  narrated  was  no  sudden  movement,  but  was 
the  logical  result  of  various  causes  which  had  long 
been  at  work;  and  we  cannot  grasp  the  significance 
of  what  followed  without  some  little  knowledge  of 
what  these  causes  were. 


Introductory.  15 

Chief  among  them  were  the  exertions  of  the  two 
parties  which  have  been  noticed  above. 

The  high  church  revival  was  not  the  antagonist 
but  the  supplement  of  the  evangelical  revival  which 
preceded  it.  It  has  been  remarked  as  a  strange 
thing  that  so  many  who  fell  under  the  spell  of  the 
Oxford  movement  had  been  brought  up  under  evan- 
gelical influences.  But  there  was  really  nothing 
strange  about  it ;  it  was  a  quite  natural  sequence  of 
events.  It  was  merely  a  passage  from  the  subjective 
to  the  objective,  from  individualism  to  collectivism ; 
from  the  great  truth  that  *' Jesus  Christ  came  into 
the  world  to  save  sinners"  to  the  other  and  kindred 
great  truth  that  *' Almighty  God  purchased  to  him- 
self an  universal  church  by  the  precious  blood  of 
His  dear  Son".  It  was  not  the  loss  of  anything,  but 
the  superaddition  of  something  more  to  what  was 
already  there.  If  it  was  not  this,  it  was  a  spurious, 
not  a  genuine,  result  of  the  movement. 

As  to  the  orthodox  movement  before  1833,  it  was 
essentially  the  same  as  the  Anglican  movement 
after  1833.  The  latter  diverged  from  the  former 
only  when  it  went  ofif  at  a  tangent;  and  that  part  of 
it  which  did  so  diverge  was  never  any  proper  part  of 
the  Anglican  revival,  as  will  appear  in  the  sequel. 
The  old  and  the  new  were  one  and  the  same  thing, 
though  they  differed  widely  in  their  methods,  their 
tempers,  and  their  tones  of  mind.  Hence  John 
Keble  would  say  to  his  Oxford  friends  when  they 
propounded  a  theological  statement:  *' It  seems  to 


i6  The  Anglican  Revival. 

me  just  what  my  father  taught  me".^  Hence  Pusey, 
when  he  met  Joshua  Watson,  the  lay  head  of  the 
Clapton  sect,  in  his  old  age,  was  delighted,  and 
perhaps  a  little  surprised,  to  find  how  closely  they 
agreed.  ^*  I  cannot  say",  he  writes,  *'how  cheering 
it  was  to  be  recognized  by  you  as  carrying  on  the 
same  torch  which  we  had  received  from  you  and 
those  of  your  generation,  who  had  remained  faithful 
to  the  old  teaching.  We  seemed  no  longer  separ- 
ated by  a  chasm  from  the  old  times  and  old  paths, 
to  which  we  wished  to  lead  people  back;  the  links 
which  united  us  to  those  of  old  seemed  to  be 
restored.  "2 

Assuredly  among  the  pioneers  of  the  Anglican 
revival  must  be  reckoned,  first  of  all, — indirectly 
and  remotely  the  Clapham  sect,  direcdy  and  very 
nearly  the  Clapton  sect. 

At  the  same  time  a  number  of  causes  had  long 
been  at  work  tending  to  create  a  craving  which 
neither  Clapham  nor  Clapton  could  supply.  First 
among  these  were  the  writings  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 
He  revived  a  love  of  the  beautiful  both  in  nature 
and  art,  and  an  interest  in  antiquity  which  had 
well-nigh  died  out ;  he  opened  out  to  men's  view  a 
wider  outlook;  he  dispelled  narrow  prejudices;  he 
presented  history  under  an  aspect  which  was  new  to 
that  generation ;  and  in  many  other  ways  he  pre- 
pared, all  unconsciously,  the  soil  for  the  seed  which 
the  Anglican  movement  was  soon  about  to  sow  in 

'Lock's  AVW^,  p,  84.  "^Chnnon's  Memoir  0/ Joshua  Wafson,  ii.  82. 

(M426) 


Introductory.  17 

it.  More  complicated  and  subtle,  but  certainly  not 
less  potent,  was  the  influence  of  Samuel  Taylor 
Coleridge,  both  in  his  prose,  his  poetry,  and  his 
conversation.  Coleridge  reminds  one  of  Colling- 
wood,  who  dropped  on  the  ground  wherever  he 
went  an  acorn,  which  was  pretty  sure  to  spring  up 
in  due  time.  It  is  fair  to  say  that  Coleridge's  trees, 
when  they  sprang  up,  were  not  all  of  the  Anglican 
type,  but  some  of  them  were ;  and  all  of  them  were 
of  a  very  different  type  from  that  which  was  pre- 
dominant before  the  movement.^  William  Words- 
worth, owing  chiefly  to  the  influence  of  his  brother 
Christopher,  cast  in  his  lot  personally  with  *'the 
orthodox",  and  showed  no  sympathy  with  the  dis- 
tinctive characteristics  of  the  movement,  eighteen 
years  of  which  his  prolonged  life  enabled  him  to 
see;  but  his  poetry  all  tended  to  prepare  the  way 
for  what  was  coming,  and  one  of  the  chief  leaders, 
John  Keble,  was  in  a  sense  his  most  ardent  disciple.^ 

^  To  give  specimens  would  be  rather  like  presenting  a  number  of  detached 
bricks  as  specimens  of  a  building;  the  whole  tone  which  pervades  his  later 
writings,  especially  the  Aids  to  Re/lection,  strikes  a  churchman  far  more 
forcibly  than  any  particular  passages  do.  But  take  the  following  passages : 
"The  Church  of  Christ  asks  of  the  State  neither  wages  nor  dignities.  She 
asks  only  protection  and  to  be  let  alone.  .  .  .  The  church  here  spoken  of 
is  not  the  kingdom  of  God  which  is  within,  and  which  cometh  not  with 
observation,  but  is  most  observable— a  city  built  on  a  hill,  and  not  to  be  hid 
— the  Church  visible  and  militant  under  Christ."  .  .  .  "There  exists,  God 
be  thanked,  a  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  in  England,  and  I  thank  God 
also  for  the  constitutional  and  ancestral  Church  of  England."  ..."  The 
safest  expression  is,  the  Church  of  Christ  in  England,  or  the  Catholic 
Church  in  England"  {On  the  Constitution  of  the  Church  and  State,  ch.  vii.). 

'  He  dedicated  to  Wordsworth  his  Lectures  delivered  during  the  ten 
year*  in  which  he  held  the  Professorship  of  Poetry  at  Oxford  (1831-1841), 
(11426)  B 


i8  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Next  we  come  to  two  men  of  a  very  different  type 
from  those  hitherto  mentioned,  John  Jebb,  Bishop 
of  Limerick,  and  Alexander  Knox,  his  guide, 
philosopher,  and  friend.  These  men  were  not  only 
pioneers,  but  actually  anticipators  of  the  movement 
in  several  important  points.  The  famous  **  Appen- 
dix" to  Bishop  Jebb's  sermons,  of  which  Knox 
was  virtually  the  author,  might  really  almost  have 
appeared  as  one  of  the  Tracts  for  the  TimeSy  while 
many  of  the  letters  of  Knox  might  have  been  the 
letters  of  a  tract-writer. 

We  come  yet  nearer  to  the  actual  movement 
when  we  turn  to  the  great  work  done  by  Hugh 
James  Rose.  Indeed  Rose  has  been  boldly  claimed 
as  the  true  '*  restorer  of  the  old  paths'V  to  restore 
which  was  avowedly  the  chief  object  of  the  whole 
movement.  The  claim  may  be  so  far  admitted  that 
of  the  workers  before  1833  no  one  can  for  a  moment 
compare  with  Hugh  James  Rose  as  far  as  direct 
work  in  the  matter  of  church  revival  is  concerned. 

calling  him  "a  true  philosopher"  and  "a  priest  of  Divine  Truth".  In  his 
undergraduate  days,  as  his  closest  friend  tells  us,  he  read  Wordsworth's 
poems  "with  avidity ;  and  the  admiration  for  his  poetry,  which  he  conceived 
in  youth,  never  waned  in  after-life".  "He  had  been  for  many  years  an 
enthusiast  in  his  admiration  of  the  man  and  the  poet",  and  when  in  1839 
Oxford  conferred  on  Wordsworth  an  honorary  degree,  and  it  fell  to  Keble's 
lot  as  Poetry  Professor  to  deliver  the  Creweian  oration,  he  hailed  the  oppor- 
tunity to  pronounce  a  hearty  panegyric  upon  his  favourite  (see  Memoir  of  the 
Rev.  John  Keble,  by  Sir  J.  T,  Coleridge,  ch.  i.  p.  17;  do.,  pp.  248-9).  It 
was  the  blending  of  religion  and  philosophy,  the  sacredness  of  Nature  as  the 
outward  expression  of  God,  the  sacredness  of  childhood,  the  sacredness  of 
common  life,  expressed  in  Wordsworth's  poems,  which  touched  Keble,  and 
which  made  those  poems  a  real  preparation  for  the  movement  which  was  to 
follow.  ^  Dean  Burgon's  Lives  of  Twelve  Good  Men,  i.  116-295. 


Introductory.  19 

It  has  fallen  to  the  lot  of  few  men  to  call  forth  such 
enthusiastic  admiration  from  his  personal  friends  as 
did  Mr.  Rose.  We  might  be  inclined  to  take  cum 
grano  the  strong  expressions  of  his  admiring  bio- 
grapher about  the  man  **who,  sixty  years  ago,^ 
at  a  time  of  universal  gloom,  panic,  and  despon- 
dency, rallied  the  faint-hearted  as  with  a  trumpet- 
blast  ; — awoke  the  sleepers ; — aroused  the  sluggish ; 
— led  on  to  glory  the  van  of  the  church's  army".^ 
But  the  dean  is  amply  borne  out  by  others  who 
knew  Mr.  Rose  personally.  Rose  was,  for  instance, 
in  Mr.  T.  Mozley's  view,  *'the  one  commanding 
figure,  and  very  lovable  man,  that  the  frightened 
and  discomfited  church-people  were  now  [1833] 
rallying  round.  Few  people  have  left  so  distinct 
an  impression  of  themselves  as  this  gentleman."^ 
He  was,  in  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Henry  Bradshaw,  a 
very  high  authority,  **the  man  who,  of  all  Cam- 
bridge men  of  that  time,  was  the  leading  spirit 
in  the  great  church  revival".*  In  the  opinion  of 
Sir  W.  Palmer,  he  was  **in  his  time  a  bright 
and  shining  light  of  the  Church  of  England.  He 
had  been  Christian  Advocate  of  the  University  of 
Cambridge.  He  was  the  most  powerful  and  most 
followed  preacher  there;  a  profound  scholar,  an 
eloquent  orator,  a  deep  thinker,  and  an  admirable 
theologian.    .    .    .    Had  this  noble  man  lived,  he 

'Written  in  1888.  «Burgon,  i.  116. 

•  Mozley's  Reminiscences,  ckiefiy  of  Oriel  College  and  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment, \.  308.  •Quotetl  by  Burgon,  i.  141. 


20  The  Anglican  Revival. 

would  have  been  the  greatest  ornament  and  the 
most  trusted  leader  of  the  church."^  And  finally , 
in  words  which  have  now  become  classical,  he  was 
the  man  "who,  when  hearts  were  faiUng,  bade  us 
stir  up  the  gift  that  was  in  us,  and  betake  ourselves 
to  our  true  mother".^  Mr.  Rose's  four  sermons  at 
Cambridge  in  1826,  **  On  the  Commission  and  Con- 
sequent Duties  of  the  Clergy",  were  by  far  the 
strongest  and  most  effective  appeal  that  had  yet 
been  made  to  the  church  to  be  up  and  doing;  and 
his  eight  sermons,  also  delivered  by  him  at  Cam- 
bridge as  Christian  Advocate  and  Select  Preacher 
in  1829,  were  equally  rousing.  Rose  also  started, 
and  ably  edited,  the  British  Magazine^  the  first 
number  of  which  appeared  in  March,  1832  ;  it  was 
afterwards  accepted  by  the  leaders  of  the  movement 
as  the  organ  of  the  party,  and  both  Newman  and 
Keble  expressed  their  determination  to  support  it, 
and  not  allow  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  to  interfere 
with  it;^  and  it  was  at  Rose's  parsonage  that  the 
first  meeting  was  held,  which  led  immediately  and 

^  Article  in  the  Contemporary  Review  for  May,  1883. 

2  Newman's  Dedication  of  his  4th  volume  of  Sermons  to  H.  J.  Rose. 

'See  Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  Newman,  i.  441;  ii,  2,  3,  Keble 
says  to  Newman:  "I  quite  agree  with  you  that  Rose's  magazine  must  be 
supported".  Newman  writes  to  Rose,  Dec.  1883,  on  the  subject  of  the 
Tracts,  and  "the  difficulty  about  interfering  with  the  British  Magazine". 
"But",  he  adds,  "we  fancy  we  might  sail  in  our  little  boat  without  the 
chance  of  your  running  us  down.  However,  we  wish  in  this  matter  [about 
issuing  tracts  periodically]  to  be  guided  entirely  by  you.  The  Church  owes 
so  much  to  the  British  Magazine,  ns  the  first  publication  which  set  up  her 
standard  when  others  shrank  from  doing  so,  that  you  have  a  right  to  this 
deference. 


Introductory.  21 

directly  to  the  Oxford  movement.  But  he  died  to( 
early  to  see  the  final  issue  of  that  movement,  though 
he  lived  long  enough  to  find  that  there  was  much 
in  its  methods  of  which  he  disapproved.  On  the 
whole,  therefore,  it  seems  to  me  that  he  must  be 
regarded  as  by  far  the  most  prominent  and  effective 
of  the  precursors  of  the  revival,  rather  than  its 
actual  originator. 

While  H.  J.  Rose  was  affecting  Cambridge,  a 
very  different  man  was  in  a  very  different  way 
affecting  Oxford,  but  still  tending  to  the  same 
general  result.  This  was  Dr.  Charles  Lloyd,  Regius 
Professor  of  Divinity,  whose  lectures  on  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer  opened  out  quite  a  new  view  to 
many  of  his  hearers.  Among  those  hearers  were 
young  men  who  afterwards  became  very  prominent 
in  the  movement,  such  as  Newman,  Pusey,  Hurrell 
Froude,  Isaac  Williams,  and  Frederick  Oakeley. 
From  the  pen  of  the  last-named  we  have  a  graphic 
account  of  the  kind  of  influence  which  these  lectures 
exercised:  ^'I  am  disposed",  he  writes,  **to  give  a 
very  prominent  place  among  the  proximate  causes 
of  the  movement  to  the  teaching  of  Dr.  C.  Lloyd, 
Regius  Professor  of  Divinity,  and  afterwards  Bishop 
of  Oxford,  who  died  in  1829.  .  .  .  Besides  being 
a  man  of  independent  thought  considerably  in 
advance  of  the  high  churchmen  of  his  time,  he  had 
in  his  youth  many  opportunities  of  intercourse  with 
French  emigrant  clergy,  to  whom  he  was  indebted, 
as  he  told  us,  for  truer  views  of  the  Catholic  religion 


22  The  Anglican  Revival. 

than  were  generally  current  in  this  country.  Upon 
the  subjects  of  Church  Authority,  Episcopacy,  the 
Apostolical  Succession,  and  others  with  which  the 
earlier  Tracts  were  almost  exclusively  occupied,  I 
do  not  remember  to  have  derived  any  very  definite 
ideas  from  Lloyd's  teaching;  but  I  do  remember  to 
have  received  from  him  an  entirely  new  notion  of 
Catholics  and  Catholic  doctrine.  ...  In  his  Lec- 
tures on  the  Anglican  Prayer  Book,  he  made  us 
first  acquainted  with  the  Missal  and  the  Breviary, 
as  sources  from  which  all  that  is  best  and  noblest  in 
that  compilation  is  derived."^  It  must  of  course  be 
remembered  that  this  is  the  account  of  a  Roman 
Catholic,  and  is  therefore  not  perhaps  quite  ex- 
pressed as  Dr.  Lloyd  himself  would  have  expressed 
it;  but  there  is  no  reason  whatever  to  doubt  its 
substantial  accuracy.  Pusey  was  a  thorough  dis- 
ciple of  Dr.  Lloyd,  and  on  his  premature  death 
mourned  for  him  as  **a  second  father",  *'the  guar- 
dian-friend, with  whose  guidance  I  had  hoped  to 
steer  securely  amid  all  the  difficult  shoals  through 
which  the  course  of  a  theologian  must  in  these  days 
probably  be  held".^ 

William  Palmer's  Origines  Liturgicce^  or  Anti- 
quities of  the  English  Ritual^  with  a  Dissertation 
on  Primitive  Liturgies^  published  in  1832,  was 
partly  an  anticipation,  partly  a  result  of  Bishop 
Lloyd's  labours;  that  is  to  say,  Mr.  Palmer  began 

*  Historical  Notes  on  the  Tractarian  Movement,  by  F.  Oakeley,  pp.  13, 14. 
'  Liddon's  Life  of  Pusey,  i.  202. 


Introductory.  23 

to  write,  or  to  collect  materials  for  writing,  his  great 
work  in  Ireland,  and  migrated  from  Trinity  College, 
Dublin,  to  Worcester  College,  Oxford,  in  order  to 
have  the  benefit  of  the  Oxford  libraries.  At  Oxford 
he  found  Bishop  Lloyd  engaged  in  a  similar  work, 
and  therefore  abandoned  his  design;  but  when 
Bishop  Lloyd  died  in  1829  with  his  work  unfinished, 
Mr.  Palmer  was  persuaded  to  resume  his  task,  and 
to  incorporate  with  it  the  results  of  Bishop  Lloyd's 
labours.  The  Origines  helped  to  remind  those 
who  had  heard  the  lectures  of  what  they  had  heard, 
and  to  inform  others  on  the  important  subject;  and 
thus  the  book  must  be  regarded  as  a  chief  factor  in 
the  preparation  for  the  movement  which  was  fast 
approaching;  for,  ''insisting  upon  the  almost  for- 
gotten fact  that  the  Prayer  Book  is  mainly  a  trans- 
lation from  earlier  office-books,  and  so  represents 
the  descent  of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England 
from  the  church  of  earlier  days,  it  powerfully 
contributed  to  increase  that  devotion  to  the  tra- 
ditions of  the  church  which  characterized  the 
Tracts".! 

In  indicating  the  preparations  for  the  movement, 
we  must  not  forget  the  impulse  given  to  the  study 
of  early  church  history  by  Bishop  Kaye,  in  his 
lectures  at  Cambridge,  as  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity,  on  the  early  Fathers,  which  were  after- 
wards enlarged  and  published.  Bishop  Kaye  has 
been  described  as   "the  first  to  recall  theological 

'  Uddon's  Life  of  Pusey,  L  364. 


24  The  Anglican  Revival. 

students  to  the  study  of  the  Fathers".^  So  far  as 
he  did  this  he  must  certainly  be  regarded  as  a 
pioneer  of  a  movement  which  had  for  its  object  a 
return  to  primitive  antiquity,  though  he  was  very 
far  indeed  from  identifying  himself  with  the  later 
development  of  that  movement. 

If  John  Keble  had  died  immediately  after  his 
publication  of  The  Christian  Year  (1827),  he  too 
would  have  had  to  be  regarded  as  a  pioneer  instead 
of  a  leader  of  the  movement.  The  effect  which  that 
sweet  work  had  in  preparing  the  way  has  been 
described  as  none  but  Newman  could  have  described 
it:  **  When  the  general  tone  of  religious  literature 
was  so  powerless  and  impotent  as  it  was  at  that 
time,  Keble  struck  an  original  note,  and  woke  up 
in  the  hearts  of  thousands  a  new  music,  the  music 
of  a  school  long  unknown  in  England".^  But  The 
Christian  Year  did  not  adequately  represent  the 
writer's  later  views.  He  himself  said  in  1845  that 
when  he  wrote  The  Christian  Year  he  did  not  fully 
understand  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Eucharist.^ 
Dr.  Pusey,  indeed,  *' always  held  that  the  real 
source  of  the  Oxford  movement  was  to  be  found  in 
The  Christian  Year";^  and  Mr.  Lock  says  with 
perfect  truth  that  **  in  it  will  be  found  nearly  all  the 
truths  and  the  tone  which  came  to  the  front  in 
Tractarianism  "  (p.  71).     Yes  I  they  are  therey  but 

1  Article  on  "  Kaye,  John,"  in  yXvt  Dictionary ^of  National  Biography. 

*  Newman's  Apologia  pro  Vitd  Sud,  p.  77. 

'  See  Lock's  Keble,  p.  56.  *  Liddon's  Life  of  Pusey,  i.  270. 


i> 


Introductory.  25 

they  hardly  do  come  to  the  front.  In  this  work 
Keble  did  for  the  church  revival  very  much  what 
in  a  preceding  generation  Cowper  did  for  the  Evan- 
gelical revival.  The  poetry  of  both  was  saturated 
with  their  respective  views,  but  these  views  were 
not  prominently  brought  forward  by  either.  You 
have  certainly  to  read  The  Christian  Year  in  the 
light  of  after  events  to  find  in  it  '*the  true  and 
primary  author"  of  the  Oxford  movement.  But, 
when  read  thus,  traces  of  him  may  be  found.  Thus, 
in  the  hymn  for  S.  Matthias'  Day  the  doctrine  of 
Apostolical  Succession  is  clearly  traceable: — 

"  Who  then,  uncall'd  by  Thee, 
Dare  touch  Thy  Spouse,  Thy  very  self  below? 
Or  who  dare  count  him  summon'd  worthily, 
Except  Thine  hand  and  seal  he  show? 
Where  can  Thy  seal  be  found, 
But  on  the  chosen  seed,  from  age  to  age 
By  Thine  anointed  heralds  duly  crown'd, 

As  kings  and  priests  Thy  war  to  wage?" 

In  the  hymn  for  Holy  Baptism,  we  have  the  doctrine 
of  Baptismal  Regeneration : — 

"A  few  calm  words  of  faith  and  prayer, 
A  few  bright  drops  of  holy  dew. 
Shall  work  a  wonder  there 
Earth's  charmers  never  knew. 

"Blest  eyes,  that  see  the  smiling  gleam 
Upon  the  slumbering  features  glow, 
When  the  life-giving  stream, 
Touches  the  tender  brow." 

In  the  hymn  for  the  Tuesday  in  Whitsun-week  we 


26  The  Anglican  Revival. 

have  the  duty  of  closely  following  out  the  church's 
system  from  Advent  to  Advent: — 

"This  is  Thy  pastoral  course,  O  Lord, 
Till  we  be  sav'd,  and  Thou  ador'd ; — 
Thy  course  and  ours — but  who  are  they 
Who  follow  on  the  narrow  way? 

"And  yet  of  Thee  from  year  to  year 
The  church's  solemn  chant  we  hear 
As  from  Thy  cradle  to  Thy  throne 
She  swells  her  high  heart-cheering  tone.' 

And  once  more,  in  the  hymn  for  Trinity  Sunday, 
we  are  taught  to  find  an  emblem  of  the  Trinity  in 
the  three  aisles  of  the  church  converging  in  the  one 
chancel : — 

"Three  solemn  parts  together  twine 
In  harmony's  mysterious  line  ; 
Three  solemn  aisles  approach  the  shrine ; 

"Yet  all  are  One — together  all 
In  thoughts  that  awe  but  not  appal, 
Teach  the  adoring  heart  to  fall. 

"Within  these  walls  each  fluttering  guest 
Is  gently  lur'd  to  one  safe  nest — 
Without,  'tis  moaning  and  unrest." 

Moreover,  Keble  imperceptibly  undermined  that 
spirit  of  complacency  with  which  it  was  the  fashion 
of  churchmen  to  regard  their  church  as  it  was. 
*'''The  Christian  Year'\  as  he  himself  says,  * 'always 
supposes  the  church  to  be  in  a  state  of  decay"; 
**and",  adds  his  latest  and  best  biographer,  '*he 
cannot  acquiesce  in  a  church  so  sluggish,  so  worldly, 
so  utilitarian,   because  of  the  purity  of  his  ideal. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement  27 

.  .  .  The  whole  volume  is  a  dirge  over  the  lost 
glory  of  the  church;  but  it  is  much  more  than  this, 
it  is  a  trumpet-call  to  Christians  to  be  true  to  the 
life  which  is  in  them,  even  though  they  may  have 
to  face  the  martyr's  death.  "^ 

The  same  tone  of  sadness,  mingled  with  an 
earnest  appeal  to  churchmen  to  be  up  and  doing, 
runs  through  the  very  striking  set  of  sermons  pub- 
lished in  1830,  by  one  whose  writings  John  Keble 
always  admired  and  recommended,  John  Miller,  of 
Worcester  College.  These  sermons,^  like  their 
writer's  Bampton  Lectures  of  181 7,  must  have  had 
the  effect  of  making  those  who  heard  or  read  them 
feel  not  quite  comfortable  under  the  state  of  things 
as  they  were. 

In  a  sketch  like  the  present,  it  must  suffice  to 
give  these  brief  indications  (which  do  not  pretend 
to  be  exhaustive)  of  the  preparations  for  the  move- 
ment. We  must  now  pass  on  to  the  first  stage  of 
the  movement  itself. 


Chapter  II. 
First  Stage  of  the  Movement  (1833-1835). 

Matters  came  to  a  climax  on  the  introduction  into 
Parliament   in   the  early  summer  of  1833  of  Mr. 

'  Lock's  KebU,  p  59. 

'  Sermons  intended  to  show  a  Sober  Application  of  Scriptural  Principles 
to  the  Realities  of  Life.  With  a  Preface  addressed  to  the  clergy.  By  John 
Miller,  late  FeUow  of  Worcester  College,  Oxford. 


28  The  Anglican  Revival. 

(afterwards  Lord)  Stanley's  Irish  Temporalities 
Bill.  The  abolition  of  the  church  cess — a  very 
unpopular  method  of  collecting  tithes — diminished 
greatly  the  income  of  the  Irish  Church;  and  to 
meet  the  deficiency  the  government  proposed  to 
suppress,  on  its  own  authority,  two  archbishoprics 
and  ten  bishoprics,  that  is,  one-half  of  the  whole 
Irish  episcopate.  Perhaps  English  churchmen 
hardly  realized  the  extreme  difficulty  of  the  situation 
in  which  the  government  was  placed;  it  had  to 
devise  some  remedy  for  a  state  of  things  which 
seemed  not  unlikely  to  bring  about  a  civil  war  in 
Ireland.  But  looking  at  it  from  their  own  point  of 
view,  they  feared  that  what  was  done  in  Ireland 
might  be  done  in  England ;  and  if  bishoprics  could 
be  abolished  by  a  purely  secular  authority,  what 
would  become  of  the  doctrine  of  apostolical  succes- 
sion? So  thought  a  little  band  of  churchmen, 
mostly  Oriel  men,  and  they  determined  at  once  to 
take  action.  The  reputation  of  Mr.  Hugh  James 
Rose  naturally  marked  him  out  as  their  leader. 
Accordingly  on  July  6,  1833,  we  find  Mr.  Rose 
writing  to  Mr.  Perceval  that  he  was  prevented  from 
attending  a  meeting  in  London,  but  ''can  I  not", 
he  adds,  ''tempt  you  here?" — that  is,  to  his  rectory 
at  Hadleigh  in  Suffolk.  On  July  10,  Mr.  Palmer 
writes  to  Mr.  Perceval:  "Our  valued  friend  Rose 
has  proposed  a  conference  of  friends  on  the  state  of 
affairs,  and  to  consider  of  the  line  we  ought  to 
adopt.    I  think  this  most  highly  desirable.    He  has 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  29 

asked  me  to  go  to  Hadleigh,  and  gives  me  hopes 
of  meeting  you,  which  would  be  an  exceeding 
pleasure.  [Hurrell]  Froude^  has  also  expressed 
his  intention  of  coming,  and  he  says  Keble  will 
also.  Newman  we  expect  every  day  from  the 
Continent,  and  I  hope  he  will  also  be  there.  I 
would  think  of  being  at  Hadleigh  about  this  day 
fortnight  if  our  other  friends  were  then  disengaged. 
Now  I  hope  you  will  be  able  to  join  in  this  little 
plan  and  conspiracy \  and  when  we  are  all  met,  it 
will  be  easy  for  us  to  consider  and  explain  all 
things  which  might  not  be  conveniently  discussed 
in  letters." 

There  is  a  singular  interest  in  these  details,  trifl- 
ing as  they  are  in  themselves;  for  the  meeting, 
which  duly  took  place,  was  in  fact  the  nucleus  of  a 
movement  which  has  revolutionized  the  Church  of 
England. 

But  before  **the  fortnight"  to  which  Mr.  Palmer 
alludes  had  elapsed,  another  event  occurred  of 
primary  importance.  On  July  14,  1833,  John  Keble 
preached  an  assize  sermon  at  Oxford,  which  was 
published  under  the  title  of  **  National  Apostacy  ". 
**  I  have  ever  considered  ",  writes  Newman,  **and 
kept  the  day  as  the  start  of  the  religious  movement 
of  1833."^  Perfectly  calm  and  unimpassioned,  yet 
outspoken  to  the  utmost  degree  of  boldness,  refined 
and  scholarly  (of  course),  yet  without  the  slightest 

*  For  an  account  of  this  remarkable  man  see  infra,  p.  70. 

*  Apologia,  ch.  i.  p.  35. 


30  The  Anglican  Revival. 

pretence  at  eloquence  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the 
term,  the  sermon  may  disappoint  the  reader  at 
the  present  day,  as  it  disappointed  Dean  Burgon, 
who  declares  that  ''the  sermon  in  question  is  by 
no  means  extraordinary".^  Nor  was  it  extraordin- 
ary in  the  sense  in  which  the  burning  language  of 
the  dean's  hero  par  excellence^  Hugh  James  Rose, 
at  Cambridge,  was  extraordinary.  But,  like  all 
Keble's  utterances,  there  was  more  effectiveness  in 
it  than  the  casual  hearer  or  reader  would  realize. 
AppJying  the  warning  of  the  prophet  Samuel  to 
the  people  who  had  rejected  God  for  their  king,  he 
pressed  upon  his  hearers  the  duty  of  resisting  a 
similar  catastrophe.  He  did  not  scruple  to  declare 
boldly  that  England  *'as  a  Christian  nation  was  a 
part  of  Christ's  Church,  and  bound  in  all  her  legis- 
lation and  policy  by  the  fundamental  laws  of  that 
church",  and  that  if  this  principle  was  disavowed, 
it  was  a  direct  disavowal  of  the  sovereignty  of  God. 
Then,  in  obvious  reference  to  the  late  Irish  measure, 
he  asked,  ''If  it  be  true  that  such  enactments  are 
forced  on  the  legislature  by  public  opinion,  is 
apostasy  too  hard  a  word  to  describe  the  temper  of 
such  a  nation?"  In  his  peroration,  he  stirs  up  his 
hearers  to  take  as  active  a  part  in  public  affairs  as 
the  duties  of  life  would  allow,  and  expresses  the 
most  absolute  confidence  in  the  final  victory  of  the 
church.  His  closing  words  are  worth  quoting: 
"  Public  concerns,  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  will  prove 

^  Lives  of  Twelve  Good' Men,  i.  173. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  31 

indeed  ruinous  to  those  who  permit  them  to  occupy 
all  their  care  and  thought,  neglecting  or  under- 
valuing ordinary  duties,  more  especially  those  of 
a  devotional  kind.  These  cautions  being  duly  ob- 
served, I  do  not  see  how  any  person  can  devote 
himself  too  entirely  to  the  cause  of  the  Apostolic 
Church  in  these  realms.  There  may  be,  as  far  as 
he  knows,  but  a  very  few  to  sympathise  with  him. 
He  may  have  to  wait  long,  and  very  likely  pass  out 
of  this  world  before  he  see  any  abatement  in  the 
triumph  of  disorder  and  irreligion.  But,  if  he  he 
consistent^  he  possesses  to  the  utmost  the  personal 
consolations  of  a  good  Christian;  and  as  a  true 
churchman,  he  has  the  encouragement  which  no 
other  cause  in  the  world  can  impart  in  the  same 
degree:  he  is  calmly,  soberly,  demonstrably  sure 
that,  sooner  or  later,  his  will  he  the  winning  side^ 
and  that  the  victory  will  be  complete,  universal, 
eternal." 

The  meeting  at  Hadleigh  rectory  took  place  on 
July  25,  and  lasted  until  July  29.  There  were  only 
four  clergymen  present,  Mr.  Rose,  the  host,  Mr. 
William  Palmer,  Mr.  A.  Perceval,  brother  of  Lord 
Arden,  and  vicar  of  East  Horsley,  and  Mr.  Richard 
Hurrell  Froude.  Keble  and  Newman  were  unable 
to  attend,  but  they  were  kept  well  posted  up  as  to 
the  proceedings,  which  were  not  very  encouraging. 
The  conference  was  to  a  great  extent  occupied  in 
revising  a  tract  entitled  The  Churchman's  Manual^ 
the  composition  of  Mr.   Perceval.     Even  the  four 


32  The  Anglican  Revival. 

who  met  do  not  seem  to  have  been  agreed  as  to  the 
remedy  to  be  applied  to  the  evils  which  all  acknow- 
ledged. There  is  an  interesting  letter  from  Newman 
to  Keble  on  the  subject,  dated  Aug.  5,  that  is,  a  week 
after  the  conclusion  of  the  conference:  *' Palmer 
has  returned  from  Rose,  and  I  have  heard  from 
Rose,  as  you  probably  have.  Froude  wishes  to 
break  with  Rose,  which  must  not  be,  I  think.  Let 
us  wait  the  course  of  events.  ...  I  fear  they  did 
not  get  on  very  well  at  Hadleigh.  Froude  wants 
you  to  give  your  friend  Arthur  Perceval  a  bit  of 
advice  which  I  think  Froude  himself  partly  requires 
[against  being  prematurely  violent].  Palmer  thinks 
both  Froude  and  Perceval  very  deficient  in  learn- 
ing, and  therefore  rash."^  To  which  Keble  replies, 
Aug.  8:  **  If  the  Hadleighans  could  not  agree  when 
inter  quatuor  muroSy  will  you  find  six  men  to  agree 
together?  "^  Froude  himself  was  evidently  dissatis- 
fied, for  he  writes  to  Perceval,  Aug.  14,  a  letter, 
beginning:  ''The  impression  left  on  my  mind  by 
my  visit  to  Rose  was,  on  the  whole,  a  gloomy 
one".3 

The  fact  is,  that  Rose,  Palmer,  and,  perhaps, 
Perceval  on  the  one  hand,  Froude,  Keble,  and 
Newman  on  the  other,  represented,  not  exactly  two 
different  parties,  but  two  different  classes  of  mind. 
The  former  group  were  essentially  conservative ; 

^Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.H.  Newman,  i.  439.  '  Id.,  p.  441. 

*  Collection  of  Papers  connected  with  the  Theological  Movement  of  i8jj, 
p.  12. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  33 

they  did  not  share  the  dissatisfaction  with  the  Church 
as  it  was,  which  was  so  strongly  felt  by  Keble, 
Newman,  and  Froude;  they  only  desired  to  see  it 
freed  from  what  they  regarded  as  the  oppression  of 
the  State.  They  were  very  different  types  of  men, 
Rose  representing  the  brilliant  and  fascinating. 
Palmer  the  learned,  and  Perceval  the  aristocratic 
or  territorial  element.  But  none  of  them  was 
prepared  to  follow  what  Newman  calls  the  *' go- 
ahead"  course,  for  which  he  and  Froude  were  ready, 
and  from  which  Keble  was  not  at  all  averse.  The 
general  object  aimed  at  by  the  two  groups  was 
the  same,  but  their  views  as  to  the  right  methods 
of  attaining  that  object  were  very  different,  as  will 
abundantly  appear  in  the  sequel.  Which  were  right 
and  which  were  wrong  need  not  here  be  discussed; 
but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  movement  was  carried 
on  by  the  latter,  not  by  the  former  group.  It  is  to 
this  group,  therefore,  that  the  plan  of  this  work  re- 
quires us  to  turn ;  and  in  order  to  enable  the  reader 
to  appreciate  better  what  was  afterwards  done,  it 
will  be  well  to  trace  out  the  antecedents  of  the  chief 
leaders  of  the  group  up  to  1833. 

Limiting  our  inquiries  to  this  date,  there  can  be 
no  question  who  claims  the  first  place.  The  order 
was  afterwards  twice  reversed,  but  at  the  commence- 
ment the  name  of  John  Keble  stands  far  above  any 
other  in  connection  with  the  movement.  Indeed,  to 
the  very  last  he  was  distinctly  recognized  by  the 

only  other  two  who  can  at  all  come  into  competi- 
( M  426 )  0 


34  The  Anglican  Revival. 

tion  with  him,  as  their  leader  and  their  head.  **  The 
true  and  primary  author",  writes  Newman,  **was 
out  of  sight  .  .  .  Need  I  say  that  I  allude  to  John 
Keble?"^  And  again,  **I  compared  myself  with 
Keble,  and  felt  that  I  was  merely  developing  his, 
not  my,  convictions".  And  again,  ^^You  [Keble] 
shall  be  censor  of  the  tracts,  but  we  will  obey  no  one 
else".^  When  Dr.  Liddon  proposed  in  1879  to 
write  a  history  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  taking 
Pusey  as  the  central  figure.  Dr.  Pusey  promised 
to  help  him  to  collect  materials,  *'but  the  central 
figure",  he  added,  ** should  be  John  Keble.  .  .  . 
I  should  be  glad  to  see  it  brought  out,  for  J.  K.  was 
a  mainspring."^  Both  Newman  and  Pusey  con- 
stantly spoke  of  Keble  as  their  spiritual  father;  and 
both — but  especially  Pusey — deferred  submissively 
to  his  counsel  in  a  very  remarkable  manner.  What 
was  there  about  this  shy,  homely,  unambitious  man 
to  give  him  such  a  place  in  the  greatest  movement 
in  the  church  since  the  Reformation?  A  brief  sketch 
of  the  early  lives  of  the  three  men,  who  were  head 
and  shoulders  above  all  others  connected  with  the 
movement,  will  perhaps  enable  us  to  answer  the 
question, — at  anyrate  it  will  showus  that  the  relation- 
ship between  the  three  was  a  perfectly  natural  one. 
/o/m  Keble  (i 792-1866)  was  the  son  of  a  country 
clergyman  of  Gloucestershire,  and  received  a  purely 
home  education.  He  was  never  even  at  a  private 
school.     Up  to  the  time  of  his  going  to  Oxford  he 

^Apologia,  ch.  i.  p.  17. 

^Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  Newman,  i.  473. 

3  Life  of  Pusey,  iv.  339. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  35 

was  educated  entirely  by  his  father,  a  scholar  and 
divine,  whose  theology  was  that  of  the  Caroline 
divines  in  the  seventeenth  century  and  the  Non- 
jurors in  the  eighteenth.  His  mother  {nee  Maule) 
was  of  just  the  same  school ;  so  from  his  earliest 
years  he  had  been  trained  in  a  definite  church 
system,  from  which  he  never  diverged,  and  had 
always  breathed  an  atmosphere  of  culture  and  re- 
finement. When  he  was  elected  to  a  scholarship 
at  Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford,  of  which  his 
father  had  been  scholar  and  fellow,  at  the  early  age 
of  fourteen  years  and  eight  months,  he  was  not  drawn 
far  into  the  vortex  of  university  life ;  for  the  Corpus 
of  those  days  had  only  about  twenty  undergraduates, 
all  more  or  less  scholarly,  who  lived  chiefly  within 
their  own  circle.  After  a  brilliant  undergraduate 
career  he  was  elected  fellow  of  Oriel,  and  was  thus 
admitted  at  the  age  of  nineteen  into  the  most  distin- 
guished society  Oxford  could  boast.  He  had  carried 
all  before  him, — a  scholarship  (1806),  a  double  first- 
class  (1810),  the  most  coveted  of  all  fellowships 
(181 1),  and  two  University  prizes,  the  Chancellor's 
essays,  both  English  and  Latin  {181 2). 

After  this  his  life  for  some  years  alternated  be- 
tween pastoral  work  in  country  cures  and  various 
work  at  Oxford.  He  was  twice  Public  Examiner 
in  the  Classical  School,  from  18 14  to  1816,  and 
again  from  182 1  to  1823.  He  was  for  six  years 
(181 7-1823)  College  Tutor  at  Oriel,  where  he  had 
to  deal  with  the  picked  youth  of  the  country  as 
pupils,  and  in    1831   he  was  elected  unanimously 


36  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Professor  of  Poetry,  which  of  course  only  entailed 
occasional  visits  to  Oxford.  All  the  rest  of  his  life 
was  passed  as  a  parochial  clergyman  in  the  country, 
but  always  amid  congenial  society  and  among  the 
simple,  rustic  poor,  contact  with  whom  does  not 
take  off  the  fine  edge  of  a  man's  mind,  as  perhaps 
contact  with  the  class  above  them  is  apt  to  do ;  and 
he  was  always  near  his  old  home.  His  poetry  is 
just  what  one  would  expect  from  such  a  career. 
Exquisitely  delicate  and  refined  thoughts,  expressed 
in  the  most  delicate  and  refined  language,  are  its 
characteristics.  Even  the  occasional  roughness  of 
versification  may  not  be  altogether  unconnected 
with  the  absence  of  a  public  school  education,  when 
public  schools  laid  excessive  stress  upon  the  form 
of  composition,  especially  in  verse.  And  his  life  in 
the  country  and  love  of  the  country  are  obviously 
factors  in  forming  his  poetical  character.  As  Dean 
Stanley  remarks:  ^'Bagley  Wood  and  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Hursley  might  be  traced  through 
hundreds  of  lines  in  The  Christian  Year^\  In  the 
words  of  his  favourite  poet : 

"  His  daily  teachers  had  been  woods  and  rills, 
The  silence  that  is  in  the  starry  sky, 
The  sleep  that  is  among  the  lonely  hills". 

No  town-bred  man  could  have  written  The  Christian 
Year^  and  no  man  could  have  written  it  who  had 
not  been  encouraged  by  a  pious  home-training  to 
study  his  Bible  in  a  way  that  few  school-boys  did ; 
for  one  of  the  features  of  the  book  is  the  Scriptural 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  37 

knowledge,  extending  even  to  the  scenery  of  Pales- 
tine, which  it  displays.  Such  was  John  Keble 
when  he  headed  the  movement  of  1833. 

Edward  Bouverie  Pusey  (1800- 1882)  was  born  at 
Pusey  in  Berkshire,  Aug.  22,  1800.  His  father, 
Philip-Bouverie,  youngest  son  of  the  first  Viscount 
Folkestone,  took  the  name  of  Pusey  in  1789  when  he 
succeeded  to  the  Pusey  estates.  His  mother  was  a 
daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Harborough,  and  to  her  he 
owed  his  early  religious  training.  "All  that  I  know", 
he  says,  **  about  religious  truth,  I  learnt,  at  least  in 
principle,  from  my  dear  mother.  But  then,  behind 
my  mother,  though  of  course  I  did  not  know  it  at 
the  time,  was  the  Catholic  Church."  "I  was  educated 
in  the  teaching  of  the  Prayer-Book.  .  .  .  The  doc- 
trine of  the  Real  Presence  I  learnt  from  my  mother's 
explanation  of  the  Catechism,  which  she  had  learned 
to  understand  from  the  older  clergy."^  In  181 2  he 
went  to  Eton,  from  whence  he  proceeded  in  1 819  to 
Christ  Church,  Oxford,  where  he  had  a  very  high 
reputation  as  an  undergraduate.  **  Shortly  after  I 
went  to  Oxford",  writes  Isaac  Williams,  '*  I  heard 
of  Pusey  as  a  man  who  ought  to  have  a  first-class 
made  for  him  by  himself,  he  being  so  superior  to 
everyone  else  in  the  mass  of  information  he  had 
acquired."^  He  justified  these  expectations  by  gain- 
ing a  particularly  good  first-class  in  1822 ;  one  of  his 
examiners,  G.  Porter,  **  predicting  his  greatness, 
and  regarding  him  as  the  man  of  the  greatest  ability 

*  Liddon's  Life  0/  Pusey,  i.  7.        ^Autobiography  of  I.   Williams,  p.  35. 


38  The  Anglican  Revival. 

he  had  ever  examined  or  known ".^  In  1823  he  was 
elected  fellow  of  Oriel,  and  in  1824  won  the  Chan- 
cellor's prize  for  the  best  Latin  essay.  He  was  per- 
suaded by  Dr.  Lloyd  to  spend  two  years  (1825- 
1827)  in  Germany,  '^to  study  the  language  and 
theology  of  the  Germans".  There  he  made  the 
acquaintance  of  several  of  the  most  famous  German 
professors,  and  was  impressed  with  the  fact  that  Eng- 
lish churchmen  were  quite  unprepared  to  grapple 
with  the  bold  speculations  of  the  Germans.  Soon 
after  his  return  to  England  (1827)  he  published  his 
first  book.  An  Historical  Enquiry  into  the  Probable 
Causes  of  the  Rationalist  Character  lately  Predom- 
inant in  the  Theology  of  Germany.  It  was  an 
answer  to  a  course  of  lectures  delivered  at  Cam- 
bridge by  Hugh  James  Rose  on  the  subject;  but  it 
is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Rose  took  the  orthodox 
and  Pusey  the  rationalistic  side.  They  both  agreed 
on  the  main  question.  *' We  ought",  he  wrote  to 
Rose  ten  years  later,  '^to  have  been  fighting  side 
by  side  instead  of  with  each  other."  But  Pusey 
thought — and  with  very  good  reason — that  he  per- 
ceived a  tendency  in  England  to  combat  rationalism 
in  exactly  the  same  inadequate  ways  in  which  it  had 
been  unsuccessfully  combated  in  Germany,  and  he 
naturally  feared  the  same  disastrous  result.  Ger- 
man pietism  corresponded  closely  with  English 
evangelicalism;  and  German  **  orthodoxism ",  as 
he  terms  it,  with  the  rather  stiff,  wooden,  inelastic 

*  See  Liddon's  Lije,  p.  32.     Mr.  Porter  made  the  remark  to  the  learned 
Canon  A.  S.  Farrar  of  Durham. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  39 

attitude  of  English  '*  orthodoxy ".  Both  lived  to 
regret  their  "German  war".  Rose  wrote  gener- 
ously :  **  I  wish  we  had  known  each  other  personally, 
and  I  am  sure  it  would  never  have  taken  place.  I 
should  have  profited  by  your  very  far  superior 
knowledge  of  the  subject,  and  should  have  done 
the  work  of  warning  the  English  student  more 
effectually."  Pusey  "was  dissatisfied  with  his  books 
[he  wrote  two],  and  withdrew  from  circulation  what 
remained  of  them  ".^  These  books  were  misunder- 
stood ;  some  thought  that  he  was  a  rationalist,  others 
that  he  was  an  evangelical,  on  account  of  his  ex- 
pressions of  sympathy  with  the  German  pietists. 
Perhaps  the  fact  that  he  was  not  ordained  deacon 
until  1828,  after  he  had  written  the  books,  helped  to 
make  men  think  that  his  opinions  were  unsettled. 

When  he  became  a  candidate  for  the  Hebrew  chair 
in  1828,  Archdeacon  Cambridge,  a  leading  high 
churchman,  informed  him  that  "some  dignitaries 
thought  him  latitudinarian,  but  he  himself  acquitted 
him  of  the  charge  ".  Pusey  wrote  to  his  constant 
friend  Bishop  Lloyd  (Oct.  1828),  "I  believe  that  prac- 
tically my  opinions  are  those  of  the  High  Church; 
that,  however  I  may  respect  individuals,  I  feel  my- 
self more  and  more  removed  from  what  is  called 
Low  Church.  I  do  not  know  any  subject  of  contro- 
versy between  High  and  Low  in  which  I  do  not  agree 
with  the  former."  Bishop  Lloyd  was  satisfied  that 
he  was  "quite  unlikely  to  cause  serious  anxiety  on 
the  score  of  rationalism  or  even  latitudinarianism  ", 

*  Liddon.  i.  X75. 


40  The  Anglican  Revival. 

and  mainly  through  Lloyd's  exertions,  as  Pusey 
himself  gratefully  recognized,  he  was  elected  to  the 
professorship.  But  the  rather  doubtful  way  in 
which  the  bishop  expresses  himself  shows  that 
Pusey  was  at  least  a  suspected  person;  and  in  1829 
those  who  were  suspicious  of  him  were  probably 
not  a  little  confirmed  in  their  suspicions  by  the  fact 
that  he  ranged  himself  with  Whately  and  Blanco 
White,  as  a  supporter  of  Sir  R.  Peel,  in  the  famous 
election  when  that  great  man  lost  his  seat,  while  his 
friends  Keble,  Newman,  Froude,  and  R.  Wilber- 
force  were  in  the  opposite  camp.  This,  however, 
was  a  political,  or  at  most  a  politico-ecclesiastical, 
not  a  theological  question.  But  the  suspicion  re- 
mained. Writing  about  the  commencement  of  the 
movement,  Palmer  says:  *'  Pusey  we  knew  nothing 
of;  he  was  supposed  to  be  favourable  to  the  in- 
novating party;  he  did  not  join  the  Association,  and 
only  became  connected  with  the  cause  when  New- 
man had  become  leader."^  The  fact  is  undoubted; 
Pusey  never  opposed,  but  he  held  aloof  from  the 
movement  at  first,  and  there  is  an  interesting  letter 
written  by  him  to  his  wife  in  1835,  which  certainly 
implies  that  he  was  at  any  rate  not  quite  steady  in 
his  convictions  at  the  time  of  *' the  German  war". 
^'I  see",  he  writes,  ''many  reasons  why  John's 
[Newman's]  statement  of  truth  should  be  attractive, 
mine  repulsive.  He  has  held  a  steady  course,  I 
have  not.     I  studied  evidences  when  I  should  have 

^  Narrative  of  Events,  &c.,  Introduction,  p.  50. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  41 

been  studying  the  Bible;  I  was  dazzled  with  the 
then  rare  acquaintance  with  German  theology,  and 
over-excited  by  it,  &c."^ 

The  *'John"  of  this  letter  introduces  us  to  the 
third  member  of  the  trio,  whose  early  history, 
however,  does  not  quite  bear  out  what  his  friend 
says  of  him. 

John  Henry  Newman  (1801-1890),  unlike  the 
other  two,  received  his  first  religious  impressions 
from  the  Evangelical  school.  He  was  the  eldest  of 
the  six  children  of  John  Newman,  a  banker  in  the 
city  of  London,  and  Jemima  his  wife,  who  was  a 
member  of  a  well-known  Huguenot  family  called 
Foudrinier,  which  had  long  been  settled  in  London. 
The  mother  directed  the  course  which  Newman's 
early  religion  took,  and,  as  might  be  expected  from 
a  descendant  of  the  Huguenots,  it  was  an  evan- 
gelical direction.  He  was  taught  to  take  a  delight 
in  reading  the  Bible,  and  to  expect  an  inward  con- 
version. When  he  was  fifteen  years  of  age  the 
longed-for  event  took  place,  the  chief  instrument  of 
his  conversion  being  a  pious  clergyman,  Walter 
Mayers,  a  classical  master  in  the  private  school  at 
Ealing  where  he  was  educated.  Of  its  reality,  he 
writes,  long  after  he  had  drifted  away  into  quite  a 
different  course,  **  I  am  still  more  certain  than  that 
I  have  hands  and  feet".*  He  was  deeply  impressed 
by  evangelical  writers,  such  as  William  Romaine, 
Joseph    Milner,    Daniel   Wilson,    and    above   all, 

'Liddon,  iL  87.  *  Apologia,  p.  4. 


42  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Thomas  Scott,  **to  whom",  he  writes  *' (humanly 
speaking)  I  almost  owe  my  soul";^  and  in  1816 
he  went  up  to  Trinity  College,  Oxford,  a  decided 
Evangelical.  He  does  not  appear  to  have  been  at 
all  shaken  in  these  views  during  his  undergraduate 
days.  He  was  a  hard  reader,  and  was  judiciously 
directed  in  his  reading  by  his  college  tutor,  the 
well-known  Thomas  Short.  But  by  one  of  those 
strange  slips  which  occasionally  occur,  he  was  about 
as  unsuccessful  in  the  schools  as  an  industrious 
scholar  of  Trinity  could  well  be.  He  read  for  a 
double  first,  but  the  result  was  that  in  the  classical 
list,  his  name  appeared  in  the  lowest  class  (a  second 
below  the  line),  and  in  the  mathematical,  not  at  all 
— that  is,  he  was  *'  gulfed  ".  Various  circumstances, 
into  which  it  is  unnecessary  to  enter,  sufficiently 
account  for  his  failure.  He  was  not  disheartened ; 
he  was  still  conscious  of  his  powers,  and  boldly 
aimed  at  the  highest  distinction  within  his  reach — 
a  fellowship  at  Oriel.  He  was  elected  on  April  12, 
1822,  a  day  which  he  '*ever  felt  the  turning-point 
of  his  life,  and  of  all  days  most  memorable  ".  But 
at  Oriel  ''there  was  that  real  isolation  of  thought 
and  spiritual  loneliness  which  were  the  result  of  his 
Calvinistic  beliefs".^  In  1824  he  was  ordained  dea- 
con, and  took  the  curacy  of  the  Evangelical  Church 
of  S.  Clement's,  Oxford,  of  course  residing  in  col- 
lege,   and    there   coming   under    the   influence   of 

>  Apologia,  p.  5. 

'  Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  Newman — Autobiography,  i.  104. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  43 

powerful  minds.  **  During  two  years  of  parochial 
duty  at  S.  Clement's  Mr.  Newman  underwent  a 
great  change  in  his  religious  opinions,  brought 
about  by  various  influences.  The  atmosphere  of  the 
Oriel  common-room  was  one;  its  members,  together 
with  its  distinguished  head  [Copleston],  being  as  re- 
markable for  the  complexion  of  their  theology,  and 
their  union  among  themselves  in  it,  as  for  their 
literary  eminence.  .  .  .  They  were  neither  High 
nor  Low  Church,  but  had  become  a  new  school, 
characterized  by  its  spirit  of  moderation  and  com- 
prehension, and  of  which  the  principal  ornaments 
were  Copleston,  Davison,  Whately,  Hawkins,  and 
Arnold."^  They  were,  in  fact,  the  Oriel  "Noetics", 
the  forerunners  of  the  Oxford  liberals.  But,  strange 
to  say,  he  also  learnt  from  them  some  of  the  chief 
doctrines  which  he  afterwards  held  as  a  Tractarian. 
From  Whately — of  all  men  in  the  world — **  he  found 
on  looking  back  that  he  had  learned  one  momentous 
truth  of  Revelation,  and  that  was  the  idea  of  the 
Christian  Church  as  a  Divine  appointment,  and  as 
a  substantive,  visible  body,  independent  of  the  State, 
and  endowed  with  rights,  prerogatives,  and  powers 
of  its  own  "^  Hawkins  **  gave  me  ",  he  says,  **  the 
Treatise  on  Apostolical  Preachings  by  Sumner,  after- 
wards Archbishop  of  Canterbury  [an  Evangelical!], 
from  which  I  was  led  to  give  up  my  remaining 
Calvinism,  and  to  receive  the  doctrine  of  Baptismal 
Regeneration  **?     The  influence  of  Whately  lasted 

^Apologia,  i.  114.  *Id,,}^.  109.  •/«/.,  p.  9. 


44  The  Anglican  Revival. 

for  four  years  (1822-1826),  but  it  was  (except  on  the 
point  above-mentioned)  a  negative  rather  than  a 
positive  influence.  It  succeeded  in  detaching  him 
from  evangelicaHsm,  but  it  never  really  succeeded 
in  drawing  him  towards  the  liberalism  of  which 
Whately  was  the  ablest  exponent.  He  tells  us, 
indeed,  that  at  one  time  he  *'  was  beginning  to  pre- 
fer intellectual  influence  to  moral ;  and  was  drifting 
in  the  direction  of  the  liberalism  of  the  day  ";^  but 
this  was  quickly  stayed  by  illness  and  bereavement. 
When  Whately  became  principal  of  S.  Alban  Hall 
in  1825  he  made  Newman  vice-principal  and  tutor; 
and  the  two  men  were  of  course  thrown  much  to- 
gether. But  they  were  so  different  that  they  could 
not  be  really  intimate ;  and  the  parliamentary  elec- 
tion of  1829,  which  unseated  Peel,  dissolved  what 
intimacy  there  was.  Newman  naturally  found  his 
closest  friends  at  Oriel  among  men  nearer  his  own 
standing.  In  1823  he  says,  *^I  had  the  intimacy 
of  my  dear  and  true  friend  Dr.  Pusey,  and  could 
not  fail  to  admire  and  revere  a  soul  so  devoted  to 
the  cause  of  religion,  so  full  of  good  works,  so  faith- 
ful in  his  affections;  but  he  left  residence  when  I 
was  getting  to  know  him  well  "J^  He  then  attached 
himself  to  two  younger  fellows,  Robert  Isaac  Wil- 
berforce  and  Richard  Hurrell  Froude.  These 
friendships  would  more  than  counterbalance  the 
influence  of  Whately  in  a  different  direction ;  and 
Froude,  in  especial,  had  a  power  over  him  which  a 

^Apologia,  p.  14.  ^Id.,  p.  i6. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  45 

younger  man  rarely  exercises  over  an  elder.  It 
was  Froude,  too,  who  brought  Newman  and  Keble 
together.  They  had  hitherto  kept  rather  apart. 
Keble  (in  Newman's  opinion)  **was  shy  of  him  in 
consequence  of  the  marks  he  bore  of  the  evangelical 
and  liberal  schools".^  Newman  regarded  Keble  as 
a  sort  of  awful  being,  to  be  admired  only  at  a  re- 
spectful distance.  But  Froude  prided  himself  in 
having  brought  the  two  to  understand  each  other, 
about  the  year  1828. 

Newman  had  by  this  time  drifted  away  from 
evangelicalism,  but  he  had  hardly  entered  into  the 
true  spirit  of  the  English  Church.  In  fact,  from 
first  to  last,  he  never  did  enthusiastically  admire 
that  church; — he  saw  her  abuses,  and  he  ardently 
set  himself  to  reform  them ;  but  she  was  never  his 
true  mother,  as  she  always  was  Keble's.  He  con- 
trasted her  with  the  Primitive  Church,  on  which 
his  attention  was  engaged  while  writing  his  History 
of  the  ArianSy  much  to  her  disadvantage.  After 
having  dwelt  mournfully  on  the  evil  effects  of 
liberalism,  and  the  weakness  of  evangelicalism  in 
the  church,  he  writes:  *'With  the  establishment 
thus  divided  and  threatened,  thus  ignorant  of  its 
true  strength,  I  compared  that  fresh  vigorous  Power 
of  which  I  was  reading  in  the  first  centuries.  In 
her  triumphant  zeal  on  behalf  of  that  Primeval 
Mystery,  to  which  I  had  so  great  a  devotion  from 
my    youth,    I    recognized    the    movement  of    my 

*  Apologia,  p.  z8. 


46  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Spiritual  Mother,  ^Incessii  patuit  Dea\  The  self- 
conquest  of  her  Ascetics,  the  patience  of  her  Mar- 
tyrs, the  irresistible  determination  of  her  Bishops, 
the  joyous  swing  of  her  advance,  both  exalted  and 
abashed  me.  I  said  to  myself,  '  Look  on  this  pic- 
ture and  on  that ';  I  felt  affection  for  my  own  church, 
but  not  tenderness ;  I  felt  dismay  at  her  prospects, 
anger  and  scorn  at  her  do-nothing  perplexity."^ 

The  fact  is,  Newman  had  never  had  a  fair  chance 
of  seeing  the  church's  system  at  work;  his  ante- 
cedents, as  sketched  above,  show  this  plainly  enough. 
A  singularly  interesting  article  in  The  Christian 
Remembrancery  written  by  one  who  knew  him  well, 
immediately  after  his  secession,  expressed  this  very 
forcibly:  ''Has  Mr.  Newman  ever  had  what  could 
be  called  a  natural  mental  position  in  our  church? 
Has  he  ever  been  her  son?  If  he  has,  he  has  not 
done  himself  justice  in  his  own  way  of  speaking  of 
her  position ;  he  has  represented  it  as  more  external 
than  it  really  was.  He  wants  a  larger  body  to  be- 
long to;  the  English  Church  is  too  small.  He  tries 
her  system  as  an  experiment.  His  own  work  was 
in  a  way  external  to  himself  all  the  time.  There 
was  a  reserve  going  on;  he  was  not  one  with  his 
church;  he  was  not  at  home  in  her;  he  had  not 
faith  in  her.  .  .  .  He  was  in  the  midst  of  a  circle 
of  Church  of  England  friends  [that  is,  at  Oriel] ;  the 
movement  had  a  pre-existence  in  them ;  he  took  it 
from  them.     He  was  their  convert  originally,  not 

^Apologia,  p.  31. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  47 

their  teacher.  It  spread  rapidly  with  his  powerful 
aid;  but  alas!  the  support  was  had,  not  the  sup- 
porter."^ It  is  fair  to  add  that  Newman's  sister, 
Harriet  (Mrs.  T.  Mozley),  writes  to  her  brother-in- 
law,  J.  B.  Mozley,  the  writer  of  the  article:  ^' There 
was  a  time,  before  you  knew  J.  H.  N.,  when  he  had 
a  thorough  attachment  to  our  church,  which  you 
do  not  give  him  credit  for"^ — but  when  that  time 
was,  does  not  appear.  At  any  rate,  it  was  with  any- 
thing but  **a  thorough  attachment  to  our  church" 
that  he  set  forth,  with  R.  H.  Froude,  and  his  father. 
Archdeacon  Froude,  in  December,  1832,  on  his 
Mediterranean  tour;  and  when  he  returned,  with  a 
firm  conviction  that  *'  he  had  a  work  to  do  in  Eng- 
land ",  he  found  himself  on  the  very  verge  of  the 
movement  with  which  his  name  is  inseparably  con- 
nected. 

From  the  summer  of  1833  the  history  of  the  church 
revival  is  the  history  of  its  three  great  leaders;  the 
future  events  of  their  lives  will  come  in  naturally  in 
the  course  of  the  narrative.  But  this  little  sketch  of 
their  antecedents  will,  it  is  hoped,  enable  the  reader 
to  see  why  it  was  that  the  other  two  paid  so  marked 
a  deference  to  John  Keble.  Far  inferior  to  Pusey 
in  learning,  and  to  Newman  in  genius,  Keble  pos- 
sessed qualifications  which  would  at  once  lead  them 
to  recognize  him  as  their  guide.     In  the  first  place, 

»  "The  Recent  Schism",  Art.  vi.  in  No.  51  of  The  Christian  Remem- 
brancer, for  January,  1846. 
^  letters  of  J.  B.  Motley,  ed.  by  his  sister,  p.  174. 


48  The  Anglican  Revival. 

he  was  eight  or  nine  years  their  senior;  and  years 
almost  count  as  generations  at  Oxford.  Newman 
had  from  the  first  an  uncomfortable  feeling  that  he 
and  his  friends  were  taking  a  prominent  position 
which  was  unbecoming  the  modesty  of  young  men. 
But  Keble  had  won  his  spurs  at  an  unusually  early 
age,  and  Newman  had  heard  of  him  as  "^  the  first 
man  in  Oxford  "  years  before  the  movement  began. 
Thomas  Mozley,  who  was  by  no  means  an  indis- 
criminate admirer  of  John  Keble,  says  of  him :  *'He 
was  present  (1828)  in  everybody's  thoughts,  as  a 
glory  to  the  college,  a  comfort  and  a  stay,  for  the 
slightest  word  he  dropped  was  all  the  more  remem- 
bered from  there  being  so  little  of  it,  and  from 
it  seeming  to  come  from  a  different  and  holier 
sphere".^ 

And  not  only  was  he  the  first  man  in  reputation, 
but  he  was  the  first  man  who  '*  turned  the  tide,  and 
brought  the  talent  of  Oxford  to  the  side  of  the  old 
theology"  {Apologia^  p.  289),  which  would  of  course 
give  him  an  additional  claim  to  the  reverence  of 
Newman  and  Pusey.  Again,  Keble  had  been 
throughout  fixed  and  steady  in  his  convictions, 
which  Newman  had  not  been  at  all,  and  Pusey  only 
in  a  very  qualified  sense.  And  yet,  though  from 
first  to  last  a  thorough  high  churchman,  he  differed 
from  the  main  body  of  the  high  churchmen  of  the  day 
in  being  free  from  that  spirit  of  optimism,  that  com- 
placency in  the  church  as  it  was,  which  exasperated 

^Reminiscences,  &c.,  vol.  i.  ch.  v.  p.  37. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  49 

Newman  beyond  measure.  When  The  Christian 
Year  **  always  supposed  the  church  to  be  in  a  state 
of  decay  ",  it  thoroughly  reflected  the  habitual  tone 
of  its  writer.  And  once  more,  Keble,  though  per- 
sonally humble  and  diffident  to  a  fault  (**If  you 
want  ta  get  anything  in  the  way  of  plain  counsel 
from  dear  John  Keble",  said  Pusey,  many  years 
later,  "you  really  must  be  on  your  guard  against 
his  humility"^) — was  bold  as  a  lion  when  a  principle 
was  at  stake.  **  Keble  is  at  length  roused,"  writes 
Newman,  just  before  the  movement,  "and  (if  once 
up)  he  will  prove  a  second  Ambrose."^  How  truly 
he  estimated  the  man  will  appear  in  the  narrative 
to  which,  after  this  not  unnecessary  digression,  we 
now  return. 

After  the  Hadleigh  meeting  the  two  sections  of 
the  movement  to  a  certain  extent  agreed  that  tracts 
should  be  issued  to  insense  people  on  church  sub- 
jects, and  that  an  association  should  be  formed  to 
combine  church  people  together;  though  one  section 
never  took  kindly  to  the  tracts,  nor  the  other  to  the 
association.  However,  "An  Association  of  the 
Friends  of  the  Church  "  was  formed,  the  objects  of 
which  are  thus  stated : — 

"  I.  To  maintain  pure  and  inviolate  the  doctrines, 
the  services,  and  the  discipline  of  the  church — that 
is,  to  withstand  all  change  which  involves  the  denial 
or  suppression  of  doctrine,  a  departure  from  primi- 
tive practices  in  religious  offices,  or  innovation  upon 

•  Life  of  Pusey,  i.  441.  'Quoted  by  Mr.  I>ock,  p.  78. 

(M4»)  D 


50  The  Anglican  Revival. 

the  Apostolical  prerogative,  orders  and  commission 
of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons. 

**2.  To  afford  churchmen  an  opportunity  of  ex- 
changing their  sentiments  and  co-operating  together 
on  a  large  scale.  "^ 

The  Association  was  short-lived,  Froude  (who  at 
this  time  had  immense  influence  over  Newman,  and 
therefore  over  the  section  which  Newman  repre- 
sented) being  *' strongly  against  any  society  or 
association  other  than  the  church  itself",  and  im- 
pressing his  views  upon  others.^  But  before  it 
became  defunct,  it  effected  at  least  one  most  im- 
portant measure.  It  elicited  a  very  unexpected  and 
general  expression  of  an  attachment  to  the  church, 
and  a  fixed  determination  not  to  see  the  national 
church  destroyed  or  even  weakened;  and  it  thus 
showed  that  the  jubilancy  of  the  church's  foes,  and 
the  despondency  of  her  friends,  were  quite  misplaced. 
This  was  done,  first  through  an  **  Address  to  the 
Primate ",  drawn  up  at  the  instance  of,  and  by. 
Palmer,  which  was  eagerly  signed  by  seven  thousand 
or  more  of  the  clergy,  and  presented  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  at  Lambeth  in  the  early  part 
of  1834.  It  expressed  a  deep  attachment  to  the 
church,  but  in  rather  vague  and  general  terms — 
even  so  moderate  a  churchman  as  Archdeacon 
Froude  called  it  ''milk  and  water".  It  was  fol- 
lowed by  a  ''Declaration  of  the  Laity",  drawn  up 

1  See  Palmer's  Narrative,  &c.,  ch.  vi.  p.  49,  and  Perceval's  Collection,  &c., 
p.  18.  'See  Perceval,  p.  18. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  51 

by  Joshua  Watson,  and  expressing  the  same  senti- 
ments, but  rather  more  definitely,  which  was  signed 
with  even  more  eagerness  by  no  less  than  two  hun- 
dred and  thirty  thousand  heads  of  families. 

All  this  showed  that  there  was  plenty  of  material 
for  what  would  now  be  called  *' church  defence"; 
but  it  did  not  show  that  there  was  an  adequate 
knowledge  of  church  principles.  To  supply  and 
disseminate  this  knowledge  was  the  object  of  the 
** Tracts  for  the  Times".  *'It  had  been  unani- 
mously agreed",  writes  Mr.  Palmer,  ** amongst 
those  who  originated  the  movement,  that  the  press 
ought  to  be  made  the  means  of  bringing  before  the 
clergy  and  laity  the  great  principles  on  which  the 
church  is  based,  and  which  had  been  almost  wholly 
forgotten.  .  .  .  We  were  anxious  to  impress  upon 
them  tha^^e  church  was  more  than  a  merely  human 
institution ;  that  it  had  privileges,  sacraments,  a 
ministry  ordained  by  Christ."^  But  they  were  not 
so  unanimously  agreed  about  the  methods  to  be 
adopted  for  bringing  about  this  result.  Mr.  Palmer, 
who,  owing  to  the  failing  health  of  Mr.  Rose,  and 
his  removal  to  the  then  remote  Durham,  became  the 
recognized  leader  of  the  old-fashioned,  conservative 
wing  of  the  movement,  was  for  doing  nothing  with- 
out general  consultation:  the  tracts  were  all  to  be 
revised  and  put  forth  by  a  committee.  Mr.  New- 
man, who  from  this  time  forth  drew  ahead  and 
became  by  far  the  most  important  and  influential 

^  Narrative t  Ac,  p,  119. 


52  The  Anglican  Revival. 

factor  in  the  movement  for  the  next  eight  or  nine 
years,  was  for  leaving  each  tract-writer  absolutely 
free  and  unfettered.  **  If  you  correct  them ",  he 
argued,  **  according  to  the  wishes  of  a  board,  you 
will  have  nothing  but  tame,  dull  compositions, 
which  will  take  no  one."^  ''Individuals  who  are 
seen  and  heard,  who  act  and  suffer,  are  the  instru- 
ments of  Providence  in  all  great  successes.  There 
is  an  awkwardness  in  tracts  coming  from  a  society. 
It  is  an  assumption  of  teaching.  And  further,  they 
must  in  consequence  be  weighed  and  carefully  cor- 
rected ;  and  thus  they  become  cold  and  formal  and 
(so  to  say)  impersonal.  An  address  with  much  in 
it  which  others  question,  yet  coming  from  an  indivi- 
dual mind,  has  life  about  it  which  is  seen  to  make 
an  impression.  .  .  .  You  will  see  I  am  for  no  com- 
mittee, secretaries,  &c.,  but  merely  for  certain  indi- 
viduals, in  every  part  of  the  country,  in  correspond- 
ence with  each  other,  instructing  and  encouraging 
each  other,  and  acting  with  all  their  might  in  their 
respective  circles."^  It  was  Newman,  again,  who 
insisted  upon  it  that  Oxford,  not  London,  should 
be  the  centre  of  the  movement.  *'  Universities  are 
the  natural  centres  of  intellectual  movements."^  **I 
do  not  think  we  have  yet  made  as  much  as  we 
ought  of  our  situation  at  Oxford,  and  of  the  defer- 
ence paid  to  it  throughout  the  country."*     *' When- 

1  Letter  to  Keble,  Nov.  1833.     Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  New- 
man, p.  463.  ^Jd.,  pp.  466,  468.    Newman  to  Palmer,  Oct.  1833, 
'  Apologia,  p.  39.      *  Newman  to  Keble,  Aug.  5,  1833.    Letters,  &c.,  p.  440. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  53 

ever  you  talk  of  the  tracts,  mind  and  persist  they 
are  not  connected  with  the  Association,  but  the  pro- 
duction of  *  Residents  in  Oxford '.  I  wish  them 
called  the  *  Oxford  Tracts ',  but  I  cannot  myself  so 
call  them  for  modesty's  sake.  So  I  think  that  soon 
I  shall  .advertise  them  as  *  Tracts  for  the  Times,  by 
residents  in  Oxford ',  which,  of  course,  will  soon  be 
corrupted  into  *  Oxford  Tracts'."^ 

Looking  back  after  an  interval  of  more  than  sixty 
years,  it  appears  to  me  that  Mr.  Newman  was  not 
only  right  on  both  points,  but  that  upon  his  insis- 
tence on  them  hinged  the  whole  success  of  the 
movement.  With  the  intuitive  insight  of  genius 
he  caught  at  once  the  secret  of  the  strength  of  his 
position,  and  Mr.  Palmer  himself  afterwards  gener- 
ously owned  it.  ** Perhaps",  he  says,  '*a  committee 
would  have  imposed  a  far  greater  restraint  than  I 
should  have  been  conscious  of,  or  designed";^  and 
he  fully  admits  the  greater  influence  of  the  Tracts 
than  of  the  Association.' 

It  was  on  September  9,  1833,  that  Newman  burst 
forth  in  print  with  his  first  tract.  It  is  entitled 
Thoughts  on  the  Ministerial  Commission^  respect- 
fully addressed  to  the  Clergy,  He  plunges  at  once 
in  medias  res  with  the  now  memorable  words:  "I 
am  but  one  of  yourselves — a  Presbyter,  and  there- 

*  Newman  to  Bowden,  Nov.  1833.    Letters,  &c.,  p.  483,  484. 

"*  Narrative,  &c.,  p.  123, 

*Id.,  Preface.  A  parallel  instance  may  be  found  in  a  different  kind  of 
warfare.  The  will  of  one  general  is  always  more  full  of  force  than  the 
decision  of  a  committee.  A  council  of  war  generally  advises  prudence  or 
even  retreat  in  face  of  difficulties. 


54  The  Anglican  Revival. 

fore  I  conceal  my  name  lest  I  should  take  too  much 
on  myself  by  speaking  in  my  own  person.  Yet 
speak  I  must,  for  the  times  are  very  evil,  yet  no  one 
speaks  against  them",  and  then  he  proceeds  to 
dwell  on  the  Apostolical  Succession  as  the  only  real 
ground  on  which  the  clergy  can  base  their  claims. 
No.  2,  on  The  Catholic  Churchy  and  No.  3,  On  Altera- 
tions in  the  Liturgy y^  bear  the  same  date,  and  are  by 
the  same  hand ;  they  are  mere  leaflets,  but  well  cal- 
culated to  rouse  those  to  whom  they  are  addressed ; 
and  they  thoroughly  bear  out  the  principle  of  the 
motto  of  the  series,  ''  If  the  trumpet  give  an  uncer- 
tain sound,  who  shall  prepare  himself  to  the  battle?" 
So  too  do  No.  4  (September  21),  Adherence  to  the 
Apostolical  Succession  the  safest  course^  and  No.  5 
(October  18),  but  they  are  evidently  by  different 
hands.  No.  4  is  by  John  Keble,  No.  5  by  *'a  lay- 
man", that  is,  J.  W.  Bowden,  Newman's  early  and 
very  intimate  friend,  whom  he  calls  **Apostolicorum 
Princeps".  When  four  tracts  had  appeared,  New- 
man was  cheered  by  a  most  encouraging  letter  from 
Rose,  of  whom  he  always  had  the  very  highest 
opinion:  *' Your  tracts  are  excellent,  and  not  too 
strong.  They  will,  I  think,  tell  better  if  separated 
All  through  the  autumn  of  1833  the  tracts  came  out 
in  rapid  succession,  many  written  by  Newman  him- 
self, and  all  under  his  inspiration. 

The  key-note  of  the  early  tracts  is  the  doctrine  ot 
the  Apostolical  Succession ;  all  else  is  subservient 

^Quoted  by  Burgon,  i.  196. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  55 

to,  and  flows  from,  this  doctrine.  On  the  supreme 
importance  of  insistence  upon  it,  both  sections  of 
the  movement  were  thoroughly  at  one.  The  three 
leaders  of  the  conservative  section.  Rose,  Palmer, 
and  Perceval,  all  wrote  decidedly  on  this  point.^ 
Before  the  plan  of  writing  tracts  had  taken  a  definite 
shape  this  doctrine  had  come  to  the  front,  for  we 
find  Keble  writing  to  his  friend  Dyson,  on  August 
26,  1832,  telling  him  that  there  were  thoughts  of 
forn)ing  *'a  kind  of  association",  the  first  object 
of  which  was  to  be  ''the  inculcation  of  primitive 
notions  regarding  the  Apostolical  Succession",^ and 
accordingly  it  was  the  burden  of  the  first  tract.  The 
doctrine  has  of  course  always  been  an  essential  part 
of  high  church  theology,  but  the  unique  importance 
now  attached  to  it  was  due  to  the  supposed  exi- 
gencies of  the  times.  There  was,  as  we  have  seen,  a 
strong  feeling  abroad  that  the  State  was  about  to 
"cast  off"  the  Church;  on  what,  then,  were  the 
clergy  to  rest  their  claim  of  respect  and  attention 
from  their  flocks?  They  must  go  back  to  the  real 
ground  on  which  their  authority  was  built.  Christ 
gave  His  Spirit  to  His  apostles;  they  in  turn  laid 
their  hands  on  those  who  should  succeed  them,  and 
these  again  on  others,  and  so  the  sacred  gift  was 
handed  down  to  the  present  bishops.  This  was  the 
doctrine  of  the  ordination  service;    if  they  rested 

*  See  Appendix  to  Rose's  Commission  and  consequent  Duties  of  the  Clergy; 
Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church  of  Christ,  esp.  vol.  i.  ch.  viii.  pp.  132-145; 
and  Perceval's  Doctrine  of  the  Apostolical  Succession. 

'Coleridge's  Memoirs,  p.  aia. 


56  The  Anglican  Revival 

upon  this  they  were  on  an  impregnable  basis,  but 
if  they  rested  upon  the  State  support,  or  upon  any 
secular  advantages  which  they  might  possess,  they 
were  resting  on  a  broken  reed,  which  might  fail 
them  any  day.  Hence  the  party  called  themselves 
'^Apostolicals". 

Meanwhile  the  more  conservative  wing  of  the 
movement  observed  with  dismay  how  rapidly  things 
were  going  ahead,  and  how  Newman  was  carrying 
all  before  him.  **The  movement",  wTites  Mr.  Pal- 
mer, **  suddenly  found  itself  Tractarian ;  that  is, 
informed,  guided,  and  presided  over  by  Newman 
alone."  He  complains,  not  unnaturally,  that  the 
tracts  were  everywhere  called,  not  ''Newman's 
Tracts",  but  ''  Oxford  Tracts",  and  that  *'  the  whole 
Association  became  responsible  for  their  contents, 
though  they  were  really  the  expression  of  Newman's 
opinions,  and  those  of  his  friends  or  disciples  whom 
he  chose  to  associate  with  him  in  his  Tracts".  The 
excellent  H.  H.  Norris,  the  clerical  head  of  the  old 
High  Church  party,  strongly  agreed  with  Palmer, 
and  appears  to  have  imagined  that  that  party  had 
succeeded  in  putting  a  stop  to  the  tracts;  for  we 
find  Hurrell  Froude  writing  to  Newman  in  Novem- 
ber, 1833:  *'As  to  giving  up  the  tracts,  the  notion 
is  odious.  Norris  writes  to  my  father  to  announce 
that  the  tract  system  (he  was  happy  to  say)  was 
abandoned.     We  must  throw  the  Z's^  overboard; 

*  "The  Z's"  was  the  cant  name  by  which  the  Tractarians  designated 
the  ' '  orthodox  ",  the  Evangelicals  being  ' '  the  peculiars  ",  and  themselves 
"  the  apostolicals". 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  57 

they  are  a  small  and,  as  my  father  says,  daily 
diminishing  party.  He  is  much  inclined  to  them 
himself,  but  will  take  trouble  to  circulate  the 
tracts."^ 

But,  in  this  case,  Newman  did  not  require  to  be 
"kept  up  to  the  mark  by  Froude".  He  had  no 
intention  of  giving  up  the  tracts,  nor  of  altering 
their  character,  to  please  anybody.  He  writes  to  his 
friend,  Bowden,  this  same  month  (November,  1833): 
**  We  shall  go  on  printing  and  circulating  through 
our  own  friends,  though  the  High  Church  party 
wish  us  to  stop  tracts  altogether.  By  us  I  mean 
Keble,  myself,  Froude,  and  our  friends,  who  are 
more  or  less  the  following  (though  not  associated  or 
bound  together  by  any  law;  that  is,  many  people 
like  naturally  their  own  way) :  Pusey  and  Harrison, 
Ch.  Ch.  (they  must  not  be  numbered  as  of  our 
party) ;  Williams  of  Trinity ;  Christie,  Rogers,  Moz- 
ley,  and  the  Wilberforces  of  Oriel ;  Thomas  Keble, 
Prevost,  Rickards,  Sale  of  Magdalen,  Rose,  Per- 
ceval, Golightly,  Dyson,  &c.  Palmer,  backed  by 
Norris,  &c.,  is  afraid  of  tracts,  and  wishes  them 
stopped,  and  is  aiming  at  an  association.  I  say  let 
every  man  employ  his  talent  in  his  own  way.  Let 
there  be  an  association,  if  they  can  do  it,  and  we 
will  be  members  of  it,  to  avoid  the  appearance  of 
schism.  Still,  why  not  also  go  on  with  tracts? 
Until  I  see  reason,  I  must.  Perhaps  Keble  will  be 
proclaimed  our  editor."     Newman  must  have  been 

*  Newman's  LetUrs,  Ac,  p.  484. 


58  The  Anglican  Revival. 

rather  sanguine  when  he  wrote  the  above  names  of 
his  adherents.  He  could  hardly  count  upon  all  **the 
Wilberforces  of  Oriel";  Golightly  soon  became  the 
bitterest  and  most  effective  of  all  the  opponents  of 
the  movement;  **Sale  of  Magdalen",  afterwards 
the  respected  vicar  of  Sheffield,  was  never  regarded 
as  a  Newmanite;  Perceval  was  certainly  more  in- 
clined to  the  Palmer  section;  and  to  Rickards, 
Newman  had  to  write  very  soon  after:  *'As  to 
your  criticisms,  I  have  been  too  busy  to  answer 
them.  The  Association  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
tracts.  The  latter  are  the  work  of  Oxford;  Keble, 
myself,  and  others  are  answerable  for  them.  .  .  . 
We  will  take  advice  and  thank  you ;  we  will  thank 
you  for  cuffs;  but  we  will  take  our  own  line  ac- 
cording to  the  light  given  us  by  Almighty  God 
and  His  Holy  Church. "^  In  December,  1833,  he 
writes  to  Froude  more  hopefully  still:  **Our 
demand  increases.  Thomas  Keble,  Harrison, 
Menzies,  Perceval,  and  a  more  important  friend 
who  at  present  is  nameless,  have  written  for  us; 
John  Miller,  Copeland,  and  Williams  are  also 
writing."^  The  mysterious  friend  who  is  nameless 
is  of  course  Pusey. 

And  so  the  tracts  went  on  all  through  1834,  ^"^ 
towards  the  close  of  that  year  forty-six  of  them 
were  collected  and  published  in  one  volume,  with 
a  remarkable  preface,  or,  as  it  is  called,  ** advertise- 
ment".    They  were  energetically  pushed  by  friends 

^Letters,  &c.,  i.  p.  490.  2  Id,,  ii.  8. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  59 

of  the  movement  riding  about  the  country  and 
distributing  them,  especially  among  the  clergy. 
Newman  himself  took  an  active  part  in  this  per- 
sonal canvass,  and  so  did  his  brother-in-law,  Thomas 
Mozley.  But  this  method  of  making  them  known 
was  not  needed  long.  The  tracts  made  their  own 
way,  and  that  as  much  by  the  hostility  as  by  the 
sympathy  which  they  evoked.  The  Tractarians 
adopted  the  very  wise  policy  ot  **  offering  no  reply 
to  the  numberless  attacks  made  on  them,  but  trust- 
ing to  the  strength  of  principles  and  internal  force 
of  truth  ".^  The  novelty  of  the  situation  attracted 
attention.  Tracts  had  of  course  long  been  a  vehicle 
by  which  men  and  parties  propagated  their  views. 
Wesley  had  had  his  tracts ;  the  Evangelicals  inside 
and  outside  the  National  Church  had  had  their 
Religious  Tract  Society  for  more  than  thirty  years, 
which  had  disseminated  a  vast  amount  of  such 
literature.  But  tracts  by  the  highest  of  High 
Churchmen,  tracts,  not  only  written  but  circulated, 
by  Oxford  dons,  and  dons  of  the  most  intellectual 
and  fastidious  college  at  Oxford,  were  a  new  thing. 
Incidents  ludicrous  enough  occurred  during  the 
process  of  circulation.  One  old  clergyman,  when 
Newman  presented  himself  on  his  missionary  enter- 
prise at  the  country  parsonage,  asked  him  sus- 
piciously whether  Whately  was  not  at  the  bottom 
of  it  all!  Another  (a  bishop!),  having  read  the 
earlier  tracts,  which  were  all  more  or  less  on  the 

*  Palmer's  Narrative,  &c.,  p.  66. 


6o  The  Anglican  Revival. 

subject  ot  the  Apostolical  Succession,  could  not 
quite  make  up  his  mind  whether  he  believed  it  or 
not  I  Another  gravely  wrote  to  a  newspaper  point- 
ing out  a  misprint  in  one  of  the  tracts :  it  had  spoken 
of  the  ^'  Eucharistic  sacrifice^\  which  of  course 
was  a  printer's  error  for  the  *' Eucharistic  sacra- 
vienf ! 

Such  incidents,  trifling  as  they  may  seem,  are 
important  as  illustrating  the  bewilderment  and 
alarm  of  old-fashioned  minds  at  the  strange  things 
that  were  going  on.  But  that  was  just  what  was 
intended.  The  *' advertisement"  to  vol.  iii.  (dated 
*'  Feast  of  All  Saints",  1836),  contrasting  the  marked 
difference  in  length,  style,  and  tone,  between  the 
tracts  before  and  the  tracts  after  the  summer  of 
1835,  says  of  the  earlier:  '^They  spontaneously 
used  the  language  of  alarm  and  complaint.  They 
were  written,  as  a  man  might  give  notice  of  a  fire  or 
inundation,  to  startle  all  who  heard  him,  with  only 
so  much  of  doctrine  and  argument  as  might  be 
necessary  to  account  for  their  publication,  or  might 
answer  more  obvious  objections  to  the  views  therein 
advocated."^  The  change  in  the  character  of  the 
tracts  marks  a  new  phase  of  the  movement,  which 
will  be  best  described  in  a  new  chapter. 

But  Newman,  besides  being  the  life  and  soul  of 
the  tracts,  was  pushing  on  the  movement  in  another, 
and  at  least  as  effective  a  way.  In  1834  he  published 
his  first  volume  of  Parochial  Sermons ;  and  according 

*  Reminiscences,  vol.  i.  ch.  xlix.  p.  316. 


First  Stage  of  the  Movement.  6i 

to  Mr.  T.  Mozley,  **the  publishers  said  that  the 
volume  put  all  other  sermons  out  of  the  market,  just 
as  Waverley  and  Guy  Mannering  put  all  other 
novels".^  And  no  wonder,  when  we  remember  that 
they  were  the  famous  Sunday  afternoon  sermons 
preached  at  S.  Mary's.  They  had  been  going  on 
since  1828,  when  Newman  succeeded  Hawkins  as 
vicar  of  the  Oriel  living  of  S.  Mary's.  But  of  course 
after  the  start  of  the  movement  they  had  an  addi- 
tional significance.  Not  that  they  often  dwelt 
directly  upon  those  doctrines  which  it  was  the 
object  of  the  movement  to  propagate;  they  were 
essentially  practical  rather  than  doctrinal.  But  with 
Newman  a  religion  which  did  not  rest  upon  dogma 
was  no  religion  at  all;  and  the  undergraduates 
and  graduates  who  listened  breathlessly  to  them 
had  quite  sense  enough  to  perceive  the  dogma 
behind  the  practical  advice.  The  service,  coming 
at  a  most  inconvenient  hour  for  university  men 
(4  p.m.),  and  being,  in  fact,  not  intended  for  them, 
was  not  crowded ;  but  those  who  did  attend  were  the 
picked  men — the  most  earnest  and  thoughtful  of  the 
future  clergymen,  statesmen,  and  men  of  letters — 
and  they  carried  away  with  them  into  all  parts  of 
the  country  ineffaceable  impressions  not  only  of 
the  sermons  but  of  the  preacher,  whose  personality 
was  even  more  impressive  than  his  sermons — great 
as  the  sermons  are,  even  when  read  in  cold  blood 
by  those  who  never  saw  the  preacher.     **  Without 

^  Reminiscenets,  Ac,  vol.  i.  ch.  xlix.  p.  316. 


62  The  Anglican  Revival. 

those  sermons,  the  movement  might  never  have  gone 
on,  certainly  would  never  have  been  what  it  was."* 
**  The  sermons  at  S.  Mary's  were  the  commentaries 
on  the  Tracts.  "2 


Chapter  III. 
Second  Stage  of  the  Movement  (1835-1839). 

In  the  summer  of  1835  ^  crisis  arose  in  the  history 
of  the  Tracts.  Newman  writes  in  a  desponding 
tone  to  Hurrell  Froude:  *'The  Tracts  are  defunct 
or  in  extremis.  Rivington  has  written  to  say 
they  do  not  answer.  Pusey  has  written  one  on 
Baptism,  very  good,  of  ninety  pages,  which  is  to 
be  printed  at  his  risk.  That  and  one  or  two  to 
finish  the  imperfect  series  (on  particular  subjects) 
will  conclude  the  whole.  I  am  not  sorry,  as  I  am 
tired  of  being  editor." 

The  final  adhesion,  however,  of  Dr.  Pusey  to  the 
movement,  which  took  place  at  this  time,  not  only 
gave  a  new  lease  of  life  to  the  Tracts,  but  marks  an 
altogether  new  era  in  their  history.  Not  that  Pusey 
had  before  this  in  any  way  disapproved  of  what  his 
friends  were  doing,  nor,  indeed,  had  entirely  stood 
aloof  from  their  work.  As  early  as  1833  he  had 
written  a  tract  (No.  18,  on  Fasting),^  stipulating, 
however,  that  he  should  attach  his  initials  to  it,  to 

^Dean  Church,  Oxford  Movement,  ch.  vii.  p.  113.  *Id.,  ch.  viii.  131. 

*  Letten  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  Newman,  ii,  124. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  63 

show  that  he  was  only  responsible  for  his  own  com- 
position; and  in  the  same  year,  in  a  letter  to  his 
brother,  he  animadverted,  with  as  much  indignation 
as  his  gentle  nature  was  capable  of  showing,  upon 
what  he  considered  a  wrong-headed  criticism  of 
the  early  Tracts  in  the  Christian  Observer.  **  It  has 
wholly  mistaken  the  object,  which  is  wholly  directed 
to  things  spiritual,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
temporals  of  the  Church."^  But  he  can  scarcely  be 
said  to  have  thoroughly  identified  himself  with  the 
movement  until  the  publication  of  his  three  tracts  on 
Holy  Baptism,  the  first  of  which  (No.  67)  appeared 
on  S.  Bartholomew's  Day,  the  second  (No.  68)  on 
Michaelmas  Day,  the  third  (No.  69)  on  S.  Luke's 
Day,  1835.  The  three  together,  with  subsequent 
enlargements,  formed  a  bulky  and  most  elaborate 
and  exhaustive  treatise  on  the  subject. 

Pusey's  adherence  was  an  instance  of  the  right  man 
coming  in  just  at  the  right  time.  The  public  had 
now  been  fairly  aroused ;  they  had  had  sufficiently 
impressed  upon  them  the  duty  of  maintaining 
Church  principles;  they  had  now  a  right  to  demand 
that  those  principles  should  be  fully  and  definitely 
explained  to  them  in  detail.  The  time  for  short, 
stirring  appeals  was  over;  the  time  for  solid,  sober 
treatises  on  divinity  had  arrived;  and  Pusey  was 
better  qualified  for  this  department  of  the  work  than 
any  other  member  of  the  group.  Palmer^can  scarcely 

*  Quoted  in  Life  of  Pusey,  \.  278. 

•That  is,  of  course,  William  Palmer,  the  writer  of  the  Treatise  on  the 


64  The  Anglican  Revival. 

be  reckoned  a  member.  Routh,  though  agreeing 
in  the  main,  never  dreamed  of  entering  the  arena; 
Rose  was  far  away  in  the  remote  north,  and  no  one 
else  could  be  compared  to  Pusey  for  extent  and 
depth  of  reading.  Moreover,  his  mild  and  con- 
ciliatory spirit  introduced  a  healing  element  into 
the  movement  which  was  certainly  needed.  The 
** fierceness"  (to  use  his  own  expression)  of  Newman, 
and  especially  of  Newman  when  ^'kept  up  to  the 
mark  by  Froude'V  had  the  very  natural  effect  of 
raising  opposition ;  and  even  in  Keble — the  gentle, 
humble  Keble — there  was  a  strong  spice,  if  not 
exactly  of  fierceness,  yet  of  a  tendency  to  give  vent 
to  the  most  unpopular  sentiments  in  the  most  uncom- 
promising way,  without  the  slightest  attempt  to 
tone  them  down.  Pusey,  again,  was  far  more  apt 
to  recognize  two  sides  of  a  question  than  was  Keble, 
Newman,  or  Froude.  Moreover,  as  Regius  Pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew  and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  he 
had  a  definite  status  in  the  University;  and  this, 
besides  giving  weight  to  the  cause,  perhaps  also 
led  him  to  see  the  necessity  of  measuring  his  words. 
By  no  one  has  his  place  in  the  movement  been 

Church  of  Christ,  who  is  so  often  referred  to  in  these  pages.  It  is  rather 
confusing  that  there  were  two  William  Palmers  connected  with  the  Oxford 
High  Churchmen  —  (i)  William  Palmer  of  Magdalen,  the  archaeologist, 
brother  of  Sir  Roundell  Palmer  (Lord  Selborne),  who  went  over  to  Rome; 
(2)  William  Palmer  of  Worcester  College,  who  used  sometimes  to  be  called 
"  Worcester  Palmer",  to  distinguish  him  from  the  other.  Unless  otherwise 
specified,  "Palmer"  in  this  volume  always  means  "Worcester  Palmer". 

^  Froude  and  Ward  were  both  "fiercer"  than  Newman;  but  Froude  was 
now  virtually  dying,  and  Ward  had  not  yet  come  upon  the  scene. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  65 

better  described  than  by  one,  with  whom  he  never 
quite  agreed,  and  who,  while  he  was  still  in  the 
English  Church,  certainly  belonged  to  the  Newman 
rather  than  to  the  Pusey  section  of  the  movement. 
**Dr.  Pusey's  moderation",  writes  Mr.  Oakeley, 
**did  nuich  valuable  service  to  the  movement.  He 
was,  as  Mr.  Newman  was  not,  a  high  dignitary  of 
the  Established  Church,  a  person  of  aristocratic 
birth  and  high  connections."  [Then  follows  a  quite 
unnecessary  fling  at  the  Church  which  the  writer  had 
left.]  **  He  was  the  only  member  of  the  Tractarian 
school  to  whom  the  Evangelical  party  had  any  kind 
of  attraction.  His  piety  was  not  only  most  real,  but 
it  was  of  a  popular  and  impressive  character.  He 
had  also  a  way  peculiarly  his  own,  and  entirely 
consistent  with  sincerity  and  simplicity,  of  rounding 
off  the  sharp  edges  of  the  strong  and  offensive  state- 
ments of  others,  and  thus  presenting  them  under  a 
far  less  odious  aspect  to  those  who  disliked  them. 
Hence  Dr.  Pusey  had  a  definite  and  most  important 
place  in  the  movement.  While  it  was  Mr.  Newman's 
office  to  stimulate,  and  his  misfortune  to  startle,  to 
Dr.  Pusey,  on  the  other  hand,  belonged  the  work 
of  soothing  and  the  ministry  of  concilir.tion.  He 
was  the  S.  Barnabas  of  the  movement."^ 

I  quote  this  rather  than  the  splendid  and  touching 
passage  on  the  subject  in  Newman's  Apologia^  partly 
because  it  is  less  known,  and  partly  because  the 
characteristic  generosity  with  which  Newman  recog- 

'  Historic  Notes  on  the  Tractarian  Movement,  by  F.  Oakeley.  pp.  48-49. 
(M426)  B 


66  The  Anglican  Revival. 

nizes  the  invaluable  services  of  Pusey,  might  lead 
the  general  reader  to  suppose  that  the  latter  became 
at  once  a  more  important  personage  in  the  movement 
than  the  former.  This  was  not  so.  Newman  still 
continued  to  be  far  and  away  the  most  influential 
leader.  He  had  qualifications  for  the  post  which 
neither  Pusey  nor  anyone  else  possessed  to  anything 
like  the  same  extent.  Again,  I  cannot  do  better 
than  quote  Mr.  Oakeley :  "  In  actual  hold  upon  others 
there  was  no  comparison  between  the  two.  Pusey's 
power  over  consciences  was  limited  by  the  degree 
of  his  disciples'  obedience;  Newman's  penetrated 
and  swayed  them  in  spite  both  of  themselves  and 
himself"  {Id,^  p.  69).  It  should  be  added  that  there 
was  not  the  slightest  rivalry  or  jealousy  between  the 
two  men ;  they  worked  together  harmoniously,  each 
in  his  own  way,  with  Keble  in  the  background  as 
a  sort  of  final  court  of  appeal  for  both, — a  Deus  ex 
machinay  invariably  to  be  called  in  when,  and  only 
when,  a  knot  worthy  of  such  a  champion  occurred. 
Considering  the  characters  of  the  two  men,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  Newman's  influence  over  indi- 
viduals should  have  been  greater  than  Pusey's.  He 
was  far  less  reserved  with  his  intimate  friends ;  the 
social  and  domestic  element  was  much  stronger  in 
him;  at  the  same  time  he  was  less  intelligible  to  the 
outer  world,  and  for  that  very  reason  the  more  attrac- 
tive to  the  inner  circle  of  which  he  formed  the  centre. 
Pusey  was  no  mystery;  he  was  simply  the  student, 
the  scholar,  and  the  saint,  a  person  to  be  regarded 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  67 

with  reverential  awe,  but  not  to  be  approached  too 
nearly,  except  as  an  oracle  to  be  consulted.  New- 
man had  his  lighter  and  more  unrestrained  mood, 
(which,  however,  was  always  checked  in  the  presence 
of  Pusey);  men  were  drawn  to  him,  and  learned  to 
regard  him  with  an  enthusiastic  devotion,  imitating 
his  very  voice  and  gestures, — which  nobody  ever 
thought  of  doing  in  the  case  of  Pusey.  He  was  not 
more  warm-hearted, — for  Pusey  had  a  very  warm 
heart — but  he  certainly  wore  more  his  heart  upon 
his  sleeve.  Perhaps  also  the  poetic  element,  which 
was  so  conspicuous  in  Newman's  character,  and  was 
wanting  in  Pusey's,  tended  to  increase  the  fascina- 
tion of  the  former.  Newman  was  restless,  startling, 
brilliant;  Pusey  calm,  staid,  and  dignified;  and  to 
young  minds  especially,  such  as  most  of  those  who 
joined  the  early  movement,  the  former  type  was 
naturally  the  more  taking  of  the  two. 

Having  thrown  himself  heart  and  soul  into  the 
cause,  Dr.  Pusey  at  once  began  to  project  various 
schemes  to  promote  it  in  the  way  which  seemed  to 
him  most  essential,  that  is,  in  the  way  of  theological 
study.  He  formed  a  Theological  Society^  which  was 
at  first  intended  to  be  confined  to  no  party  in  the 
Church.  Men  were  invited  to  join  who  had  no 
sympathy  with  the  founders'  views;  but  these  either 
declined  or  soon  withdrew;  and  the  Society  became 
as  much  a  part  of  the  movement  as  the  Tracts  them- 
selves. Indeed  it  was  one  of  the  chief  means  by 
which  the  Tracts  were  kept  up  in  their  new  shape. 


68  The  Anglican  Revival. 

The  members  met  in  Dr.  Pusey's  house,  when  one 
of  them  would  read  a  paper  on  some  theological 
subject;  and  then  the  paper  would  appear,  some- 
times altered  and  greatly  enlarged,  either  as  a 
''  Tract  for  the  Times  "  or  in  the  British  Magazine. 
Isaac  Williams'  views  on  Reserve  and  John  Keble's 
on  Mysticism,  of  which  we  shall  hear  more  pre- 
sently, were  first  expressed  in  papers  read  before 
the  Theological  Society. 

Another  and  a  far  more  ambitious  project  also 
originated  about  the  same  time  with  Dr.  Pusey. 
This  was  '^  A  Library  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Holy 
Catholic  Church  anterior  to  the  Division  of  the  East 
and  West,  translated  into  English".  Pusey,  Keble, 
and  Newman  were  to  be  the  three  joint-editors, 
and  Pusey  was  delighted  with  the  project,  not  only 
as  being  quite  in  his  own  line,  but  also  as  tending 
to  unite  the  trio  more  closely  together.  ^*You 
know,"  he  writes  to  Keble  (1836),  *'a  treble  cord  is 
not  easily  broken ;  last  year  you  and  Newman  left 
me  to  write  my  tracts  *  On  Holy  Baptism  '  by  myself; 
so  this  year  I  have  intertwined  yours  and  Newman's 
names  so  fast  that  I  hope  they  will  not  easily  slip 
away."^  Pusey  brought  out  the  first  volume.  The 
Confessions  of  S.  Augustine^  and  wrote  a  preface, 
pointing  out  the  advantages  of  patristic  studies; 
but  in  course  of  time  the  giant's  share  of  the  task 
fell  upon  the  saintly  Charles  Marriott.^  The  benefits 
of  the  great  undertaking  could  not  be  better  stated 

'  Life,  i.  425.  '  For  a  full  account  of  this  good  man  see  supra,  p.  37. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  69 

than  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Pusey's  biographer:  **  The 
Library  of  the  Fathers  was  at  once  an  encouraging 
and  a  steadying  influence;  it  made  thoughtful 
adherents  of  the  movement  feel  that  the  Fathers 
were  behind  them,  and  with  the  Fathers  that  ancient, 
undivided  Church  whom  the  Fathers  represented. 
But  it  also  kept  before  their  minds  the  fact  that  the 
Fathers  were  in  several  respects  unlike  the  moderns, 
not  only  in  the  English  Church,  but  in  the  Church 
of  Rome.  It  reminded  them  of  a  type  of  life  and 
thought  which  all  good  men  in  their  best  moments 
would  have  been  glad  to  make  their  own."^ 

Another  project  of  Dr.  Pusey,  closely  connected 
with  the  Library  of  the  Fathers  (which  could  of 
course  find  work  for  many  hands),  but  also  having 
the  wider  object  of  encouraging  theological  study 
generally,  was  to  support,  first  in  his  own  house, 
and  then  in  a  house  he  hired  for  the  purpose,  some 
promising  young  B.A.s  who  were  without  the 
benefit  of  a  fellowship,  and  give  them  work  to  do 
for  him.  Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley,  who  was  invested  with 
a  sort  of  headship  over  the  establishment,  calls  it 
**a  reading  and  collating  establishment  to  help  in 
editing  the  Fathers ";2  but  this  was  clearly  not  the 
whole,  nor  indeed  the  main  purpose  of  Pusey's 
benevolent  scheme.  Such  men  as  J.  B.  Mozley  and 
Mark  Pattison  ought  not  to  have  been  left  out  in 
the  cold  by  the  electors  to  fellowships  so  long  as 
they  were:  both  obtained  at  last  the  object  of  their 

^Life,  i.  434.  ^Letters,  p.  78. 


70  The  Anglican  Revival. 

ambition ;  but  meanwhile  they  were  chiefly  supported 
by  Pusey,  and  it  is  needless  to  say  that  any  work 
done  by  them  for  him  was  good  of  its  kind. 

The  movement  gained  Pusey  and  lost  Hurrell 
Froude  almost  at  the  same  time.  When  Pusey 
joined  the  party,  Froude  was  practically  a  dying 
man,  and  on  Feb.  28,  1836,  to  the  infinite  regret  of 
his  many  friends,  he  died  at  his  native  Dartington. 
With  Froude  passed  away  the  most  daring  and  "go- 
ahead  "  spirit  connected  with  the  whole  movement. 
Newman  was  enthusiastic,  but  Froude  was  far  more 
so;  Newman  waged  war  against  the  complacency 
which  was  a  characteristic  of  the  old  Church  party, 
but  Froude  was  still  more  exasperated  against  it; 
Newman  was  not  over-cautious  in  his  invectives 
against  the  fallacies  and  prejudices  of  the  age,  but 
Froude  was  ten  times  less  so.  With  an  intense 
earnestness  and  thoroughness  of  conviction,  with  a 
fiery  energy  which  would  ride  over  anything,  with 
a  courage  which  sometimes  amounted  to  audacity, 
and  with  an  irresistibly  attractive  personality,  there 
is  no  saying  what  would  have  happened  if  his  short 
life  had  been  prolonged.  But  it  is  not  a  very  pro- 
fitable speculation  to  conjecture  what  might  have 
been.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  in  one  respect  the  in- 
fluence of  Froude  was  likely  to  have  had  exactly  the 
opposite  effect  to  that  of  Pusey.  The  one  seemed, 
of  all  men,  the  most  calculated  to  trouble  the  waters, 
the  other,  to  pour  oil  upon  them ;  and  the  fact 
that  Froude  dropped  out  just  when  Pusey  began 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  71 

to  make  his  influence  felt  seemed  to  promise  that 
henceforth  the  movement  would  create  less  hostility. 
After  events,  however,  proved  that  this  was  not  to 
be  ttie  case ;  and  the  causes  are  not  far  to  seek. 

The  death  of  Dr.  Burton,  on  Jan.  19,  1836,  created 
a  vacancy  in  the  Regius  Professorship  of  Divinity, 
and  Lord  Melbourne  nominated  to  the  vacant  post 
Dr.  Renn  Dixon  Hampden.  Dr.  Hampden  was 
an  Oriel  man,  and  had  been  a  fellow  in  the  days  of 
Copleston,  Arnold,  and  Whately.  He  had  been 
brought  into  contact  both  with  the  Oriel  Noetics 
and  the  Oriel  Tractarians;  he  can  scarcely  be  said 
to  have  identified  himself  with  either,  but  he  ap- 
proached nearer  the  former  than  the  latter.  His 
university  career  had  been  a  distinguished  one,  and 
in  1832  he  was  appointed  Bampton  Lecturer,  when 
he  took  for  his  subject  ''The  Scholastic  Philosophy 
in  its  relation  to  Christian  Theology ".  In  the 
fifteenth  century  this  would  have  been  an  attractive 
subject;  but  it  was  hardly  so  in  the  nineteenth, 
when  men  had  forgotten  all  about  scholasticism. 
So  the  Bamptons  fell  rather  flat  at  the  time,  though 
there  were  some  who  thought  they  detected  in  them 
sentiments  of  a  dangerous  tendency.  The  lecturer 
uttered  nothing  against  the  doctrines  of  Christianity, 
but  he  ascribed  much  of  the  phraseology  in  which 
those  doctrines  were  clothed  in  later  times  to  the 
scholastic  philosophy,  and  that  philosophy  he  con- 
demned in  toto.  Scholasticism,  he  thought,  had 
created  **an  atmosphere  of  mist"  between  us  and 


72  The  Anglican  Revival. 

primitive  truth.  The  Bamptons  were  not  published 
until  1834,  ^"  which  year  Hampden  also  published 
a  pamphlet  entitled  Observations  on  Religious  Dis- 
senty  in  support  of  the  government  measure  for 
admitting  dissenters  into  the  universities,  and  in 
the  same  year  he  was  appointed  Professor  of  Moral 
Philosophy.  Those  who  had  suspected  the  ^*  Bamp- 
tons "  were  confirmed  in  their  suspicions  by  the 
Observations^  and  Newman  frankly  told  Hampden 
(whom  of  course  he  knew  personally)  that  his  pam- 
phlet tended  to  make  shipwreck  of  the  Christian 
faith,  and  (what  was  a  dire  offence  at  Oxford)  to 
disturb  the  peace  of  the  university.  The  matter 
would  probably  have  blown  over;  but  when  in  1836 
Hampden  was  appointed  by  the  crown  to  teach  that 
ver)^  subject  on  which  his  soundness  was  regarded 
as  doubtful,  the  old  High  Church,  the  new  High 
Church,  and  the  Low  Church  parties  in  Oxford 
banded  together  to  oppose  what  all  alike  regarded 
as  a  disastrous  appointment.  Hampden  himself, 
in  a  truly  Christian  spirit,  offered  to  resign,  but  the 
prime-minister  was  firm;  whereupon  the  Oxford 
Convocation,  which,  after  a  long  resistance  on  the 
part  of  the  heads  of  houses,  was  at  last  allowed  to 
act,  showed  its  disapproval  in  a  most  marked  way. 
After  a  futile  attempt,  which  was  quashed  by  the 
veto  of  the  proctors,  it  returned  to  the  charge  after 
the  expiration  of  the  proctors'  year  of  office,  and 
succeeded  in  passing  by  an  immense  majority 
(474  to  94),  in  May,  1836,  resolutions  that  the  new 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  73 

professor  should  be  deprived  of  two  important 
privileges  attached  to  his  office,  that  of  voting  for 
the  select  preachers,  and  that  of  being  a  judge  on 
any  question  of  heresy  which  was  brought  before 
the  university. 

Though  the  opposition  to  Dr.  Hampden's  ap- 
pointment was  a  general  one,  including  all  parties 
except  the  Liberals,  who  were  then  very  few  in 
numbers,  the  main  brunt  of  the  odium  fell  upon  the 
Tractarians ;  and  there  was  a  sort  of  rough  justice 
in  this,  for  there  is  no  doubt  that  they  constituted 
the  backbone  of  the  opposition.  The  odium  found 
its  bitterest  expression  in  an  article  published  in 
the  Edinburgh  Review  for  April,  1836,  under  the 
ominous  title  of  ''The  Oxford  Malignants".  It 
was  written  by  Dr.  Arnold,  and  illustrates  how  ex- 
ceedingly unpopular  the  Oxford  men  were  outside 
their  own  circle,  for  Dr.  Arnold  was  a  representa- 
tive man.  ''Was  there  ever",  he  asks,  "an  accusa- 
tion involving  its  unhappy  promoters  in  such  a 
dilemma  of  infamy?"  [as  that  which  accused  Hamp- 
den's Bamptons  of  heterodoxy].  The  "charges  were 
known  to  have  proceeded  from  authors  whose  cen- 
sure was  to  be  courted  by  every  good  Christian 
minister".  They  were  "a  few  obscure  fanatics". 
The  attack  "bears  upon  it  the  character,  not  of 
error,  but  of  moral  wickedness^\  "  In  such  a  pro- 
ceeding we  see  nothing  of  Christian  zeal,  but  much 
of  the  mingled  fraud,  and  baseness,  and  cruelty  of 
fanatical  persecution.     And   for  such   persecution 


74  The  Anglican  Revival. 

the  plea  of  conscience  is  not  admissible;  it  can  only 
be  a  conscience  so  blinded  by  wilful  neglect  of  the 
highest  truth,  or  so  corrupted  by  the  habitual  indul- 
gence of  evil  passions,  that  it  rather  aggravates 
than  excuses  the  guilt  of  those  whom  it  misleads."^ 
It  will  be  noticed  that  the  article  was  written,  and, 
indeed,  published  before  the  final  meeting  of  Con- 
vocation. 

But  a  far  stronger  reason  for  the  outcry  against 
the  new  school  than  the  Hampden  controversy  was 
the  raising  of  the  Roman  question,  which  from 
various  circumstances  came  to  the  front  at  this 
period.  On  '^The  Feast  of  the  Circumcision,  1836", 
Newman  published  the  first  of  his  tracts  (No.  71) 
^'against  Romanism",  beginning  with  the  words, 
''The  controversy  with  the  Romanists  has  over- 
taken us  like  a  summer's  cloud".  Perhaps  it  is 
difficult  to  read  this  tract  without  being  biassed  by 
what  afterwards  happened  to  the  writer;  but  it 
certainly  seems  to  me,  especially  in  its  earlier  part, 
to  be  a  singularly  cold  and  faint-hearted  defence  of 
the  English  Church  against  Rome;  it  leaves  the 

^  For  a  defence  of  the  article,  or  rather  an  explanation  of  Arnold's  attitude 
when  he  wrote  it,  see  Stanley's  Life  of  Arnold,  pp.  350-354.  Dean  Stanley 
frankly  owns  that  the  article  contains  "  the  most  startling  and  vehement, 
because  the  most  personal,  language  which  he  ever  allowed  himself  to  use", 
and  that  ' '  the  offence  caused  by  it,  even  amongst  his  friends,  was  very  great ". 
Dr.  Arnold,  in  a  "letter  to  an  old  pupil"  (see  Life,  pp.  369-370),  implies 
that  Mr.  Newman  had  made  unfair  extracts  from  Hampden's  writings,  and 
it  is  fair  to  add  that  some  years  later  Bp.  S.  Wilberforce,  having  carefully 
read  the  Bampton  Lectures  and  Observations  on  Religious  Dissent,  thought 
the  same.  Charles  Marriott  also  in  later  years  says  that  he  had  an  uncom- 
fortable feeling  tliat  they  had  not  been  quite  fair  to  Hampden. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  75 

impression  that  the  writer  is  profoundly  dissatisfied 
with  the  state  of  his  own  church;  that  he  feels  the 
majority  of  the  popular  arguments  against  Rome 
to  be  fallacious,  and  that  he  is  more  impressed  than 
he  cares  to  own  by  the  counter-arguments  of  Rome. 
One  can  well  understand  a  really  strong  English 
Churchman  like  Hugh  James  Rose  protesting  some- 
what indignantly  against  the  very  hesitating  tone  in 
which  Newman  writes.  *' You  must",  says  Rose,  *'let 
me  not  endure^  but  Urue — and  warmly  and  passion- 
ately love — my  mother  church."  The  whole  letter, 
as  quoted  by  Dean  Burgon,^  is  well  worth  reading; 
and  the  reader  should  remember  that  the  writer  was 
at  least  the  equal  of  Newman  in  learning,  in  earnest- 
ness, in  judgment — in  everything,  in  short,  except 
brilliancy. 

The  Hampden  controversy  helped  to  press  the 
Roman  question  on  the  attention  of  the  movement 
party.  The  friends  of  Dr.  Hampden  met  the  charge 
of  heresy  by  a  counter-charge  of  Romanism,  and 
raised  against  them — as  it  was  never  difficult  to  do 
— the  "No  Popery"  cry;  and  the  Evangelicals,  who 
had  joined  them  in  a  most  unwonted  alliance,  urged 
upon  them  the  necessity  of  clearing  themselves 
from  the  charge  of  Popery.  Again,  the  astute  Dr. 
Wiseman,  regarding  the  present  as  a  favourable 
opportunity,  on  his  return  to  England  began  to 
lecture  in  London,  in  1836,  on  **the  principal  doc- 
trines of  the  Catholic  Church";  and  it  was  thought 

*  See  Ldvts  of  Twelvt  Good  Men,  i.  214-221. 


76  The  Anglican  Revival. 

that  these  lectures  were  a  challenge.  The  glove  had 
been  thrown  down,  and  it  would  be  cowardice  not 
to  take  it  up.  Nor  were  the  Tractarians  at  all  un- 
willing to  do  so.  They  felt  that,  apart  from  special 
circumstances  and  outside  pressure,  the  relations 
between  England  and  Rome  needed  readjustment. 
Pusey  expresses  this  view  clearly  and  strongly  in  a 
letter  to  Newman  in  1836.  *'As  far  as  I  know, 
most  of  our  old  controversy  with  Rome  was  carried 
on  upon  wrong  (Genevan)  principles;  it  would  be  a 
good  thing  to  have  one  on  the  whole  subject  on 
right  principles;  it  would  bring  out  these  principles; 
people  would  see  that  Catholic  principles  can  be 
maintained  against  Popish,  and  would  receive 
them  the  rather  because  they  are  on  their  own 
side."^ 

The  upshot  of  it  all  was  that  in  1837  Newman  pub- 
lished his  very  remarkable  work  on  The  Prophetical 
Office  of  the  Church  viewed  relatively  to  Romanism 
and  Popular  Protestantism..  He  had  been  en- 
gaged in  it  for  three  years;  it  contained  the  sub- 
stance of  a  correspondence  with  ''a  learned  French 
priest",  and  of  some  of  the  noted  lectures  delivered 
by  him  in  Adam  de  Brome's  chapel  in  S.  Mary's, 
Oxford.  Its  spirit  is  certainly,  as  he  says,^  not  so 
gentle  towards  Rome  as  Tract  71  was,  but  it  seems 
to  me  to  show  yet  more  clearly  how  little  hold  the 
English  Church,  as  a  definite  system,  had  upon 
Newman's  mind.     In  it  he  elaborates  his  famous 

1  Life,  ii.  4.  ^Apologia,  p.  64. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  77 

theory  of  the  Via  Media  ;^ — in  fact  it  was  afterwards 
republished  in  the  volumes  entitled  The  Via  Media, 
But  what  is  this  Via  Media  but  the  religion  of  all 
English  Churchmen  who  had  adhered  faithfully  to 
the  original  intention  of  the  English  Reformation? 
The  deflections  from  that  original  intention  were 
many  and  frequent,  but  they  were  deflections ;  and 
those  who  formed  the  backbone  of  the  Church  of 
England,  her  great  divines,  did  not  deflect.  For  a 
well-chosen  list  of  them, — which,  however,  might 
then  have  been  multiplied  ten-fold,  and  noiv  a  hun- 
dred-fold,— we  have  only  to  turn  to  Newman's  own 
Catence  Patrum  (that  is,  post-reformation  fathers), 
from  Bilson  and  Hooker  in  the  sixteenth  century  to 
Van-Mildert  and  Mant  in  the  nineteenth.  And  yet 
Newman  could  write  in  his  Introduction:  '*It  may 
be  said  that  Protestantism  and  Popery  are  real 
religions;  no  one  can  doubt  about  them;  they  have 
furnished  the  mould  in  which  nations  have  been 
cast;  but  the  Via  Media  has  never  existed  except 
on  paper,  it  has  never  been  reduced  to  practice;  it 
is  known,  not  positively  but  negatively,  in  its  differ- 
ences from  the  rival  creeds,  not  in  its  own  properties; 
and  can  only  be  described  as  a  third  system,  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other,  partly  both,  cutting  between 
them,  and,  as  if  with  a  cruel  fastidiousness,  trifling 
with  them  both,  and  boasting  to  be  nearer  antiquity 
than  either.     What  is  this  but  to  fancy  a  road  over 

*He  had  already  written  two  tracts  (Nos.  38  and  41),  entitled  The  Via 
Media,  but  these  are  slight  and  popular. 


yS  The  Anglican  Revival. 

mountains  and  rivers,  which  has  never  been  cut  out? 
When  we  profess  our  Via  Media  as  very  truth  of  the 
Apostles,  we  seem  to  be  mere  antiquarians  or  ped- 
ants, amusing  ourselves  with  illusions  or  learned 
subtilties,  and  unable  to  grapple  with  things  as 
they  are.  ...  It  cannot  be  denied  there  is  force  in 
these  considerations  ", — and  so  forth. 

Surely  it  is  not  surprising  that  Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley 
(as  learned  and  acute  a  man  as  Mr.  Newman  him- 
self), after  quoting  these  words,  should  add:  '*  Mr. 
Newman  seems  to  start  with  a  deep,  latent  incredu- 
lousness  as  to  her  [the  English  Church's]  very 
existence,  a  primary  doubt  as  to  whether  she  has 
anything  at  all  in  her,  and  is  made  of  anything 
more  than  paper.  He  says,  *Here  is  an  experiment 
to  be  tried ;  we  have  a  church  that  we  know  nothing 
about,  and  it  has  to  be  unfolded  and  brought  out ; 
it  is  a  mere  experiment'."^ 

It  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  what  the  magic 
touch  of  genius  can  effect,  that  Mr.  Newman's 
volume  produced  a  far  greater  impression  than  W. 
Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church  of  Christy  which 
appeared  in  the  following  year  (1838).  The  works 
were  singularly  characteristic  of  their  respective 
authors.  In  the  former  there  is  genius,  brilliancy, 
an  unrivalled  beauty  of  style,  but  a  painful  un- 
certainty and  unsettlement,  as  of  one  who  has  not 
yet  found  a  sure  footing;  in  the  other  a  little  stiffness 

iSee  The  Christian  Remembrancer,  No.  51,  January,  1846,  art.  vi.,  "The 
Recent  Schism". 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  79 

and  formality,  a  style  which  never  carries  one  away 
with  it,  but  an  absolute  certainty  of  conviction,  a 
sure  footing  from  which  one  feels  instinctively  that 
it  will  be  impossible  to  dislodge  the  writer.  It  is, 
as  Dean  Church  remarks,  ''an  honour  to  English 
theology  and  learning";^  *'a  most  learned,  most 
careful  composition — one  which  no  Anglican  could 
write  but  himself",  as  Newman  generously  owns; 
but  probably  for  one  who  reads  Palmer,  a  hun- 
dred will  read  Newman.  However,  Mr.  Palmer's 
book  was  received  with  well-deserved  applause  by 
the  Tractarians,  and  it  conduced,  perhaps,  to  bring 
the  two  sections  of  the  movement  nearer  together 
than  they  had  been  since  the  commencement  of  the 
Tracts. 

Two  compositions,  however,  which  belong  to  the 
year  1838,  not  only  widened  again  the  breach  be- 
tween the  two  sections,  but  also  tended  more  than 
anything  that  had  yet  been  written  to  bring  the  whole 
movement  into  disfavour.  One  was  the  appearance 
of  Tract  No.  80,  "On  Reserve  in  communicating 
Religious  Knowledge".  The  writer,  Mr.  Isaac 
Williams,  seemed  the  last  man  in  the  world  likely 
to  cast  a  fire-brand.  Sensitive  and  retiring  almost 
to  a  fault,  a  lover  of  peace  and  quietness,  a  most 
loyal  son  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  a  pupil 
of  the  Fairford  school,  he  might  have  been  expected 
to  pour  oil  upon  the  troubled  waters  rather  than  to 
disturb  them.     But  he  was  a  man  of  a  singularly 

*  The  Oxford  Movement,  p.  187. 


8o  The  Anglican  Revival. 

delicate  mind;  intellectually,  no  less  than  morally, 
he  shrank  from  the  blatancy  and  coarseness  with 
which  the  highest  truths  were  tossed  about  even  by 
good  Christians  whose  minds  were  of  a  less  delicate 
texture  than  his  own.  Against  this  tendency  he 
wrote  his  first  tract  on  ''Reserve".  The  term  ** Re- 
serve" was,  he  tells  us,^  suggested  to  him  by  New- 
man ;  and  it  must  be  owned  that  the  suggestion  was 
not  a  happy  one,  hinting,  as  it  did,  that  there  was 
something  kept  in  the  background,  which  was,  in 
fact,  one  of  the  chief  offences  with  which  the  Trac- 
tarians  were  charged.  ''Some",  he  says,  with 
characteristic  naivete^  "were  alarmed  at  the  name 
more  than  anything  else" ;  and  we  may  well  believe 
that  it  was  so;  for,  turning  to  the  tract  (or  rather 
volume,  for  it  covers  82  pages)  itself,  we  find  that 
at  least  three-fourths  of  it  is  devoted  to  proving  up 
to  the  hilt,  with  a  perfect  wealth  of  illustration,  the 
fact  that  both  in  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New 
there  was  a,  certain  reserve  in  communicating  re- 
ligious knowledge.  It  is  difficult  to  see  how  any 
intelligent  reader  of  the  Bible  could  deny  the  fact, 
and  what  reasonable  reply  he  could  make  to  Mr. 
Williams'  superabundant  proof  of  it.  The  sting  of 
the  tract  (to  the  few  who  got  beyond  the  title)  must 
have  lain  in  part  iii.,  where  the  writer  applies  his 
principle  to  the  popular  system  of  the  day;  and, 
most  of  all,  in  his  strictures  on  the  indiscriminate 
and  exclusive  prominence  which  was  given  in  it  to 

"^Autobiography,  p.  90. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  8i 

the  doctrine  of  the  Atonement.  Here,  perhaps,  the 
Evangelicals  had  reason  to  complain  that  justice 
was  not  done  to  the  teaching  of  their  best  men ;  but 
it  really  is  difficult  to  see  why  so  violent  an  outcry 
should  have  been  raised  against  the  tract  as  a  whole. 
Mr.  Williams,  however,  had  all  the  calm  courage 
of  his  spiritual  mentor,  John  Keble ;  and,  instead 
of  being  silenced  by  the  clamour,  he  at  once  set 
himself  to  work  to  produce  another  and  much  longer 
tract  on  the  same  subject,  which  appeared  as  No.  87, 
dated  The  Feast  of  the  Purification,  1840.  So  far 
from  retracting  anything  that  he  had  written,  he 
calmly  declared  at  the  commencement  that  **  after 
diligent  examination  of  all  that  has  been  said  against 
his  former  tract,  he  is  not  aware  of  one  single  argu- 
ment adduced  that  touches  the  question ;  but  much 
vague  declamation,  and  strong  alarms  expressed, 
because  the  view  interferes  with  certain  peculiar 
religious  opinions,  or  on  account  of  some  motives 
attributed  to  the  writer's  friends,  or  on  other  similar 
grounds,  which,  in  fact  (even  were  they  true),  in  no 
way  affect  him  or  this  principle".  Many  events, 
however,  happened  before  this  later  tract  appeared. 
One  of  the  most  startling  of  these  events  was  the 
appearance,  in  1838,  of  the  first  series  of  Froude's 
Remainsy  edited  by  Keble  and  Newman  jointly. 
It  is  not  surprising  that  this  publication  raised  a 
violent  outcry;  it  gave  to  the  world  the  off-hand 
utterances  of  a  young  enthusiast,  whose  opinions 
would  probably  have  toned  down  with  age,  but  were 

(M42G)  V 


82  The  Anglican  Revival. 

here  expressed  with  all  the  recklessness  of  inexperi- 
ence, and  were  only  intended,  in  the  first  instance, 
to  be  read  by  sympathetic  friends.  His  views  on 
the  English  Reformation  and  Reformers  were  suffi- 
ciently startling:  *'  The  present  church  system  is  an 
incubus  upon  the  country".  *'The  Reformation 
was  a  limb  badly  set — it  must  be  broken  again  in 
order  to  be  righted."  The  English  Reformers  gen- 
erally were  '^  a  set  of  men  with  whom  he  wished  to 
have  less  and  less  to  do".  Jewell  in  particular  was 
''an  irreverent  dissenter" ;  Latimer  ''a  martyr  some- 
thing in  the  Bulteel  line".^  One  can  conceive  the 
horror  with  which  such  sentiments  would  be  read  by 
men  with  whom  '*our  happy  establishment  in  church 
and  state",  *'our  glorious  Reformation",  and  ''our 
martyred  Reformers",  were  almost  articles  of  faith! 
It  has  been  thought  that  the  editors  miscalculated 
the  effect  which  the  book  would  produce;  but  the 
theory  is  not  very  complimentary  to  their  judgment. 
Surely  they  must  have  known  that  the  glamour  of 
Froude's  personality  would  not  affect  the  general, 
still  less,  the  hostile  reader, — and  his  name  was 
legion, — who  would  greedily  seize  upon  any  handle 
which  could  be  turned,  as  Froude  could  so  easily 
be,  against  the  movement.  Moreover,  how  does  it 
agree  with  the  fact  that,  when  they  found  out  their 
mistake  they  nevertheless  published  in  the  following 

^  H.  B,  Bulteel  had  been  a  Low-church  .clergyman  in  Oxford,  but  his 
license  to  preach  had  been  revoked  by  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  in  1831,  and 
he  severed  his  connection  with  the  Church  of  England. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  83 

year  (1839)  a  second  series  as  outre  as  the  first? 
And  this  they  introduced  with  a  preface  pointing 
out  how  Froude's  sagacity  had  anticipated  all  the 
improvements  that  had  taken  place,  and  representing 
him,  not  as  a  disturber  of  the  people,  but  as  a  pro- 
phet indeed.  This  preface  is  said  to  have  been 
chiefly  the  work  of  Keble ;  and  it  is  highly  charac- 
teristic of  the  man,  though  not  of  the  popular  con- 
ception of  him ;  for  Keble  was  always  for  the  bold 
course.  The  other  editor,  Newman,  writing  to  his 
friend,  F.  Rogers,  in  July,  1837,  gives  six  reasons 
why  Froude's  private  letters  should  be  published ; 
and  to  his  co-editor  he  writes  at  the  same  time :  *' We 
have  often  said  the  movement  must  be  enthusiastic. 
Now  here  is  a  man  fitted  above  all  others  to  kindle 
enthusiasm."^  May  it  not  have  been  that  both 
editors  put  forth  the  Remains  with  their  eyes  per- 
fectly wide-open  as  to  what  the  result  would  be? 
That  they  were  not  unwilling  that  the  enfant  terrible 
of  the  movement  should  say  his  say  and  startle  the 
public?  The  public  "was  startled;  it  took  in  all 
seriousness  the  audacious  dicta  of  Froude  as  if  they 
were  stamped  with  the  approval  of  the  whole  party, 
which  it  denounced  with  increased  vigour  accord- 
ingly. 

It  is  impossible  to  help  connecting  with  the  pub- 
lication of  Froude's  Remains  the  starting  of  that  pro- 
ject which  gave  to  Oxford  one  of  the  most  beautiful 
of  its  many  beautiful   monuments,  the   **  Martyrs' 

^  Letttrs,  b*c.,  of  J.  H.  Newman,  ii.  337,  and  340-1. 


84  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Memorial ",  opposite  Balliol  College,  on  the  spot 
on  which  Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer  had  been 
burnt.  The  greatest  offence  of  Froude  was  that  he 
had  spoken  disparagingly  of  the  English  reformers 
generally,  and  of  these  men  in  particular.  The 
project  of  the  Memorial  originated  in  a  small  meet- 
ing held  towards  the  close  of  1838  at  Oriel  in  the 
rooms  of  Mr.  Golightly,  who,  having  begun  as  a 
friend  of  the  movement,  had  soon  become  its  bit- 
terest and  most  persistent  foe.  Everybody  seems  to 
have  connected  the  Memorial  with  the  Remains^ 
but  there  was  some  division  of  opinion  as  to  the 
course  which  should  be  pursued.  Keble  and  New- 
man were  from  the  first  opposed  to  the  project,  and 
so  were  moderate  men  like  Palmer  and  Benjamin 
Harrison.  But  Hook  and  S.  Wilberforce  were  in 
favour;  and  so,  strange  to  say,  was  Pusey  to  a 
certain  extent  at  first,  until  he  was  persuaded 
otherwise  by  Keble  and  Newman.  *'  My  final  con- 
clusion", he  writes  to  Harrison,  **  about  the  Monu- 
ment is  that  /  had  rather  not  have  anything  to  do 
with  it.  Three  years  ago  I  printed  (Baptism,  part 
iii.),  that  the  great  mercy  in  our  Reformation  was 
that  we  had  no  human  founder ;  we  were  not  identi- 
fied with  men,  or  any  set  of  men."  Harrison  had 
written  to  him  a  little  earlier,  '*!  heard  the  other 
day  that  it  would  seem  in  its  first  origination  to 
have  been  called  forth  by  the  publication  of  Froude's 
Remains y  and  so  designed  as  an  antagonistic  move- 
ment".    Keble  writes  to  Pusey,  **  I  cannot  under- 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  85 

stand  how  poor  Cranmer  could  be  reckoned  a 
bond  fide  martyr  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Primi- 
tive Church.  Was  he  not  an  unwilling  sufferer?" 
And  in  the  same  letter  he  declares  boldly,  *'I  am 
not  at  all  prepared  to  express  a  public  dissent  from 
Froudenn  his  opinion  of  the  Reformers  as  a  party  ".^ 
On  the  other  hand,  So  Wilberforce  writes  to  Hook, 
regretting  that  *'our  good  Oxford  friends  run  down 

reformers,  and  will  not  subscribe  to  the  ^  Martyrs' 
Memoriar".2 

It  was  said  of  the  Memorial,  **  It  will  be  a 
good  cut  against  Newman  ";  ^  but  it  was  not  a  cut 
which  made  him  smart.  He  was  far  more  pained 
by  another  cut,  a  much  gentler  one,  which  he 
received  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  same  year,  1838. 
Of  course  it  was  of  the  very  essence  of  a  movement 
which  originated  above  all  things  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  Apostolical  Succession,  to  have  the  sanction 
of  the  successors  of  the  apostles — though  in  its  early 
days  it  was  singularly  unsuccessful  in  obtaining 
that  sanction.  But  Newman  was  more  sensitive 
than  the  other  two  leaders  about  the  approbation 
or  disapprobation  of  individual  bishops.  His  own 
diocesan.  Bishop  Bagot,  had  been,  and  still  con- 
tinued to  be,  a  most  kind,  considerate,  and  judicious 
friend,  and  had,  in  fact,  incurred  much  odium  for 
dealing  so  gently  with  him.  In  the  spring  of  1838 
Bishop  Bagot  delivered  a  charge  to  the  clergy  of 

»See  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  it  64,  67,  and  71. 

^  Lift  of  Bishop  S.  Wilberforce,  i.  132.  *  Life  of  Pusey,  ii.  67. 


86  The  Anglican  Revival. 

the  Oxford  diocese,  in  which  he  expressed  some 
slight  disapproval  of  parts  of  the  Tracts — so  slight 
that  the  enemies  of  the  movement  were  much  dis- 
satisfied. It  was  quite  enough,  however,  for  New- 
man. He  writes  at  once  to  Keble — the  one  friend 
on  whose  advice  he  always  acted  in  a  crisis — **  I 
am  just  come  away  from  hearing  the  bishop's  charge, 
and  certainly  I  am  disappointed  in  the  part  in  which 
he  spoke  of  us.  He  said  he  must  allude  to  a  remark- 
able development,  both  in  matters  of  discipline  and 
doctrine,  in  one  part  of  the  diocese ;  he  had  had  many 
anonymous  letters  charging  us  with  Romanism,  &c. 
I  must  cease  the  tracts  if  the  bishop  says  parts  are 
dangerous."  Keble  agreed,  and  Newman  wrote  to 
Bowden,  *'  The  bishop  has  given  us  a  slap.  What 
he  said  was  very  slight  indeed,  but  a  bishop's 
lightest  word,  ex  cathedra^  is  heavy.  The  whole 
effect  was  cold  towards  us.  ...  I  felt  it  impossible 
to  continue  the  Tracts,  and  wrote  to  Keble  about  it. 
He,  without  knowing  my  opinion,  quite  took  the 
same  view,  stating  it  very  strongly."^  Pusey  took 
a  different  view,  but  when  it  was  a  question  between 
Keble  and  Pusey,  Newman  always  followed  Keble ; 
and  he  turned  upon  his  friend  Pusey  with  some- 
thing of  his  old  fierceness,  ^*  I  do  not  think  you 
enter  into  my  situation,  nor  can  anyone.  I  have  for 
several  years  been  working  against  all  sorts  of 
opposition,  and  with  hardly  a  friendly  voice.  Con- 
sider how  few  persons  have  said  a  word  in  favour 

*  Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  Newman,  ii.  257  and  260. 


Second  Stage  of  the  Movement.  87 

of  me.  Do  you  think  the  thought  never  comes 
across  me  that  I  am  putting  myself  out  of  my  place? 
What  warrant  have  I  for  putting  myself  so  forward 
against  the  world?  Am  I  a  bishop  or  professor,  or 
in  any  station  which  gives  me  a  right  to  speak? "^ 
So  he  wrote  to  the  Archdeacon  of  Oxford,  using  the 
same  words  as  he  used  to  Bowden,  and  offered  to 
submit  the  Tracts  entirely  to  the  bishop's  disposal. 
He  also  wrote  to  the  bishop  himself,  offering  to 
withdraw  any  of  the  Tracts  over  which  he  had  con- 
trol, if  he  were  informed  which  were  those  to  which 
his  lordship  had  objections,  and  declaring  that  he 
should  feel  a  more  lively  pleasure  in  knowing  that  he 
was  submitting  to  the  bishop's  expressed  judgment, 
than  he  could  have  even  in  the  widest  circulation  of 
the  volumes  in  question.  The  bishop,  however,  did 
not  desire  that  any  measures  should  be  taken,  and 
the  matter  dropped. 

In  spite — partly,  perhaps,  in  consequence — of  the 
bitter  hostility  which  it  had  evoked,  the  movement 
had  spread  most  rapidly  and  widely,  and  its  prin- 
ciples had  sunk  most  deeply  into  the  hearts  of  many 
churchmen  by  the  close  of  1838.  Mr.  Palmer  ex- 
presses indignantly,  but  not  unjustly,  the  character 
of  a  great  part  of  the  opposition  against  it.  *' Party 
feeling  has  led  to  every  species  of  unfairness.  Exag- 
geration of  facts  has  almost  universally  prevailed; 
motives  have  been  unjustly  imputed;  character  has 
been  traduced."^     This  kind  of  tactics  is  sure  in  the 

'^U/e  of  Dr.  Pusey,  ii.  58,  *  Narrative  0/ Events,  b'c,  p.  197. 


88  The  Anglican  Revival. 

long  run  to  defeat  its  own  end.  Up  to  this  time 
the  friends  of  the  movement  had  manifestly  the 
Prayer-Book  on  their  side,  and  the  Fathers  at  their 
back.  Churchmen,  at  any  rate,  though  they  might 
condemn  Keble,  Newman,  and  Pusey,  would  think 
twice  before  they  condemned  the  early  Fathers  and 
the  great  English  divines  of  the  seventeenth  century ; 
and,  if  they  could  divest  themselves  of  prejudice — 
a  large  **if" — must  have  seen  on  which  side  these 
indisputable  authorities  were.  The  *' Catenas  Pa- 
trum"  and  the  *^  Library  of  the  Fathers"  were 
overwhelmingly  powerful  allies  of  the  movement. 
And  hitherto,  the  differences  between  its  friends 
had  been  mainly  differences  about  the  means  by 
which  the  end  was  to  be  attained,  not  about  the  end 
itself.  But  now  came  a  change  in  this  vital  point. 
In  the  year  1839  the  movement  enters  upon  a  new 
and  very  alarming  phase,  which  will  form  the  sub- 
ject of  the  next  chapter. 


Chapter  IV. 
Third  Stage  of  the  Movement  (1839-1845). 

The  eventful  year  1839  opened  with  bright  pro- 
spects for  the  movement.  The  leaders  had,  as  we 
have  seen,  wisely  acted  on  the  principle  of  making 
no  direct  reply  to  the  attacks  which  had  been  made 
upon  them  from  all  quarters;  they  had  simply  en- 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  89 

forced  what  they  believed  to  be  the  truth,  and  left  it 
to  make  its  own  way. 

But  the  time  had  now  arrived  when  they  were 
forced  to  vindicate  their  conduct  and  their  principles. 
They  had  professed  the  utmost  readiness  to  comply 
with  the  wishes  of  the  bishops,  as  successors  of  the 
Apostles;  and  when  his  diocesan,  Bishop  Bagot, 
requested  Dr.  Pusey  to  make  some  form  of  declara- 
tion which  would  clearly  show  his  loyalty  to  the 
English  Church,  Pusey  at  once  complied,  and  wrote 
his  famous  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford^  in  which 
he  cleared  Tractarianism,  as  it  then  was,  from  any 
leaning  towards  Rome,  and  vindicated  the  Via 
Media  as  the  faith  of  the  Primitive  Church  **  after 
whose  model  our  own  was  formed".  This  was  a 
task  which  Pusey  was  far  better  qualified  to  perform 
than  either  Keble  or  Newman :  he  was  not  only  the 
most  learned  of  the  three,  but  also  the  one  who  was 
most  in  touch  with  other  schools  of  thought.  The 
**  Letter"  was  an  admirable  one,  and  was  accepted 
by  the  Tractarians,  as  a  body,  as  expressing  their 
views.  It  was  published  on  S.  Matthias'  Day  (Feb- 
ruary 24)  1839 — the  date  is  important  in  the  light 
of  future  events  now  to  be  recorded. 

**  In  the  spring  of  1839",  writes  Newman,^  **my 
position  in  the  Anglican  Church  was  at  its  height. 
I  had  supreme  confidence  in  my  controversial  stattiSy 
and  I  had  a  great  and  still  growing  success  in  re- 
commending it  to  others."     But  in  April,  1839,  he 

^  Apologia  fro  Vitd  Sud,  ch.  iii.  p.  93. 


90  The  Anglican  Revival. 

published  in  the  British  Critic  his  marvellously  able 
article  *'  On  the  State  of  Religious  Parties" — "  the 
last  words  which  I  ever  spoke  as  an  Anglican  to 
Anglicans",  *'my  parting  address  and  valediction 
to  my  friends,  though  I  little  knew  it  at  the  time".^ 

What  brought  about  the  startling  change? 

It  was  not  quite  so  startling  as  it  seemed.  In 
spite  of  his  success  in  exercising  unbounded  influ- 
ence over  others,  we  have  his  own  word  for  it 
that  he  was  not,  and  never  had  been,  quite  settled 
himself.  In  tracing  his  mental  history  up  to  1841, 
he  writes:  **  And  first,  I  will  say,  whatever  comes  of 
saying  it,  for  I  leave  inferences  to  others,  that  for 
years  I  must  have  had  something  of  an  habitual 
notion,  though  it  was  latent,  and  had  never  led  me 
to  distrust  my  own  convictions,  that  my  mind  had 
not  found  its  ultimate  rest,  and  that  in  some  sense 
or  other  I  was  on  a  journey".^  The  stages  of  this 
journey  he  describes  with  painful  vividness. 

In  June,  1839,  he  began  to  study  the  history  of  the 
Monophysites,  and  the  conviction  flashed  upon  him 
that  his  church  of  the  Via  Media  was  in  the  position 
of  the  Oriental  communion,  while  Rome  was  where 
she  now  is.  If  the  Monophysites  were  heretics, 
were  not  the  Anglicans  so  too?  In  the  autumn  of 
1839  he  read  an  article  in  the  August  number  of  the 
Dublin  Reviciv  on  **The  Anglican  Claim"  by  Dr. 
Wiseman,  in  which  a  parallel  was  drawn  between 
the  Donatists  and  the  Anglicans.     It  did  not  con- 

"^  Apologia  pro  Vitd  Sud,  ch.  iii.,  p.  94.  "/</.,  p.  119. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  91 

vince  him  at  the  time,  but  a  friend  pointed  out  to 
him  the  words  of  S.  Augustine,  quoted  in  the 
Review^  *'  Securus  judicat  orbis  terrarum",  a  dictum 
which  corresponded  closely  with  a  dictum  of  Aris- 
totle, with  which  as  an  Oxford  man  he  must  have 
been  familiar:  ''What  all  men  say,  that  we  say". 
The  dictum  applied  to  the  Donatists ;  did  it  not  also 
apply  to  the  Anglicans?  If  it  did,  the  argument 
from  antiquity  was  gone,  the  theory  of  the  Via 
Media  was  absolutely  pulverized.  Then,  as  will 
shortly  appear,  he  wrote  Tract  90,  and  the  outcry 
which  it  raised  showed  him  that  he  could  not  be 
allowed  to  hold  the  articles  in  a  Catholic  sense,  and 
this  alienated  him  still  more  from  the  Anglican 
Church.  This  was  in  the  spring  of  1841 ;  in  the 
summer  of  the  same  year  he  determined  to  put  aside 
controversy,  and  devoted  himself  to  his  translation 
of  S.  Athanasius.  But  this,  of  course,  drew  his 
attention  to  the  Arians,  with  whom  S.  Athanasius 
waged  war,  and  he  found  the  same  phenomenon 
which  had  so  startled  him  in  the  history  of  the 
Monophysites.  The  pure  Arians,  he  thought,  cor- 
responded to  the  Protestants,  the  Semi-Arians  to 
the  Anglicans,  and  again  Rome  now  was  what  it 
was  then. 

Contemporary  as  well  as  past  history  contributed 
to  his  unsettlement.  The  scheme  of  the  Jerusalem 
Bishopric,  for  which,  however,  the  church  as  a 
body  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  responsible,  seemed 
to  him  a  recognition  of  heresy,  allowing,  as  it  did, 


92  The  Anglican  Revival. 

heretics  to  put  themselves  under  an  Anglican  bishop 
without  any  renunciation  of  their  errors.  He  sent  a 
solemn  protest  against  the  project  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  (November  ii,  1841);  but  the  project 
was  carried  out,  and  this  was  *'the  last  blow  that 
broke  him".  Henceforth  it  was  merely  a  question  of 
time  when  he  would  leave  the  church  of  his  fathers. 
In  1839  another  actor  comes  upon  the  scene  who 
was  a  very  prominent  figure  in  the  movement  for 
the  next  six  years.  ^'The  only  real  news",  writes 
Newman  to  his  friend  Bowden  in  May,  1839,  *'is 
the  accession  of  Ward  of  Balliol  to  good  principles. 
He  is  a  very  important  accession."^  But  if  by 
'^good  principles"  are  meant  the  principles  of  the 
early  Tractarians,  Mr.  Ward  was  no  accession  at 
all,  as  Newman  himself  afterwards  discovered. 
*' Your  father",  he  told  Mr.  Wilfrid  Ward,  the  son 
and  most  interesting  biographer  of  W.  G.  Ward, 
**was  never  a  High  Churchman."  And  Mr.  Wil- 
frid Ward  himself  writes:  **He  had  no  distinctive 
affection  for  the  Anglican  Church.  He  disliked  it 
in  the  present,  and  he  knew  nothing  of  its  past. 
The  study  of  primitive  times  was  uncongenial  to  his 
unhistoric  mind."^  The  chief  religious  influence 
which  had  affected  him  was  that  of  Dr.  Arnold,  as 
interpreted  by  A.  P.  Stanley.  But  he  was  now 
attracted  to  the  Tractarians,  first  by  Froude's  Re- 
mains (the  chief  attraction  of  which  was  probably 

^  letters  and  Correspondence  oj  J.  II.  Newman,  ii.  282. 

2  William  George  Ward  and  the  Oxford  Movement,  p.  136  and  141. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  93 

Froude's  dislike  of  the  Reformers  and  dissatisfaction 
with  the  church  as  it  was),  and  then  by  the  irresist- 
ible fascination  of  Newman,  to  whom  he  attached 
himself,  as  so  many  did,  with  enthusiastic  devotion. 
**  My  creed",  he  said  to  his  friend,  James  Lonsdale, 
**  is  very  short.  Credo  m  Newinannum^\'^ 

With  W.  G.  Ward  is  generally  coupled  his  friend 
and  brother-fellow  of  Balliol,  Frederick  Oakeley,  an 
able  man  and  elegant  writer  who  had  been  trained 
in  Evangelicalism.  These  two  became  the  most 
prominent  and  influential  members  of  the  distinc- 
tively Romanizing  section  of  the  movement,  which 
was  gradually  gaining  strength,  and  was  influ- 
encing Newman  rather  than  being  influenced  by 
him. 

It  is  no  wonder  that  the  loyal  friends  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church  viewed  with  dismay  the  advance  of  this 
section,  which  was  putting  the  most  effective  of  all 
weapons  into  their  enemies*  hands.  No  one  was 
more  alarmed  at  the  Romeward  tendency  than 
Pusey;  and  though  there  was  no  semblance  of  a 
division  personally  between  the  two  great  leaders 
resident  at  Oxford,  each  became  unconsciously  a 
centre  round  which  a  section  rallied.  **A  certain 
party  in  this  place  [Oxford]",  wrote  Mr.  Ward  to 
Mr.  Golightly  in  1841  (and  he  might  have  written 
it  earlier),  **  might  now  be  considered  to  be  divided 
into  disciples  of  Mr.  Newman  and  disciples  of  Mr. 
Pusey, — the  latter  opposed,  the  former  no  longer 

» Apologia  pro  Vitd  Sud,  ch.  iii. ,  p.  33. 


94  The  Anglican  Revival. 

opposed,  to  Rome."^  But  this  requires  modification. 
Just  as  Wilkes  was  not  a  Wilkite,  so  Newman  was 
not  a  Newmanite.  He  wished  to  be  quiet  and 
think  the  momentous  question  out  for  himself;  but 
his  so-called  disciples  would  not  allow  him ;  he  was 
being  pushed  on  by  others,  rather  than  pushing 
others  on.  Besides  the  decided  Romanizers,  there 
were  others  who  joined  the  movement  as  a  new 
thing,  and  looked  down,  as  from  an  eminence,  on 
cautious,  old-fashioned  churchmen.  A  wise  and 
judicious  letter  of  Dr.  Pusey,  written  in  1839  to  one 
of  those  gentlemen,  will  illustrate  what  is  meant: 
**  Allow  me  one  word  of  advice  to  yourself,  which  is. 
Do  not  think  that  you  have  possession  of  any  new 
thing.  What  you  have  which  is  true  has  been 
taught  quietly  and  unostentatiously  by  many  in  all 
times  before  you ;  it  is  in  the  Catechism  and  Liturgy; 
it  has  only  been  brought  out  into  open  day,  and 
seems  new  to  those  who  had  forgotten  it."^ 

It  was  in  order  to  steady  down  these  reckless 
and  ardent  spirits  that  Isaac  Williams  started  the 
project  of  putting  forth  a  series  of  Plain  Sermojis  by 
Writers  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  *'  I  saw",  he 
tells  us,  **  among  ourselves  greater  dangers  than 
those  from  without,  which  I  attempted  to  obviate  by 
publishing  the  Plain  Sermons. "^  He  enlisted  among 
his  contributors  John  and  Thomas  Keble,   Pusey, 

*"  Correspondence  illustrative  of  the  actual  state  of  Oxford,    1842" — 
quoted  in  Pusey's  Life,  ii.  229. 

^Life  0/  Pusey,  ii.  144.  *  Autobiography,  p.  96. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  95 

Copeland,  and  Newman  himself;  and  perhaps  there 
would  be  no  one  more  ready  to  help  in  the  work 
than  Newman,  for  no  one  suffered  from  the  danger 
more  than  he.  Rash,  impulsive  persons  called 
themselves  his  disciples,  and  embarrassed  him  by 
going  farther  than  he  was  at  all  prepared  to  go 
himself;  and  he  was  not  at  all  sorry  to  have  the 
opportunity  of  checking  these  ardent  spirits,  which 
he  did  by  contributing  a  whole  volume  to  the  series. 
The  first  series  appeared  in  January,  1839,  and 
other  series  followed.  The  effect  of  the  publication 
was,  in  Mr.  Williams'  opinion,  **at  the  time  very 
quieting".  But  it  did  not  permanently  check  the 
advance  of  a  party  which  was  not  nearly  so  strong 
as  it  was  thought  to  be,  and  thought  itself  to  be, 
but  was  still  strong  enough  and  noisy  enough  to  be 
very  embarrassing.  Newman  began  to  be  almost 
in  despair  about  his  position  at  Oxford,  and  con- 
sulted Keble,  his  never-failing  resource,  as  to  the 
advisability  of  his  resigning  S.  Mary's,  giving  three 
reasons  for  such  a  course:  (i)  because  he  was  not 
influencing  his  own  proper  parishioners;  (2)  because 
he  was  exercising  an  influence  on  undergraduates 
to  which  he  was  not  called ;  (3)  because  of  the  ten- 
dency of  his  opinions  to  create  Roman  sympathies. 
"  The  third",  he  writes  to  his  friend  Rogers  (No- 
vember, 1840),  with  a  touching  humility  which 
would  seem  almost  ludicrous  and  unnatural  to  those 
who  did  not  know  the  relationship  which  subsisted 
between  Newman  and  Keble,  **was  the  only  ground 


96  The  Anglican  Revival. 

he  thought  much  of,  and  he  gave  me  full  leave  to 
resign  if  I  could  do  it  without  creating  scandal.  At 
the  same  time  he  said  he  wished  me  to  remain,  and 
did  not  think  it  a  reason  necessitating  resignation. 
Upon  this  I  felt  I  ought  to  remain,  because  what  I 
wanted  to  get  from  him  was  leave  to  do  so."^ 

Thus  matters  went  on  through  1840,  the  move- 
ment still  gaining  ground  rapidly  on  all  sides,  and 
embarrassed  rather  than  checked  in  its  progress  by 
the  un-English  party  within  the  fold.  But  in  the 
early  part  of  1841  came  *Uhe  beginning  of  the 
end"  of  the  ^^  Oxford  Movement",  properly  so- 
called.  The  first  symptom  was  the  appearance  of 
John  Keble's  famous  Tract  89,  *'  On  the  Mysticism 
Attributed  to  the  Early  Fathers  of  the  Church". 
Like  No.  80,  the  substance  of  it  had  been  the  sub- 
ject of  more  than  one  paper  read  at  meetings  of  the 
Theological  Society  in  Pusey's  house.  Like  No. 
80  also,  its  title  probably  helped  largely  to  cause 
the  offence  which  it  created;  for  to  English  ears  in 
the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  **  mysticism  "^ 

^  Letters  and  Correspondence  of  J.  H.  Newman,  ii.  314,  &c. 

2  "Mysticism"  is,  like  "Methodism",  a  term  given  by  enemies,  not  by 
friends.  The  so-called  "mystic  writers"  rarely  describe  themselves  as 
such;  and  they  are  called  by  their  admirers  not  "mystical",  but  "spiritual" 
writers.  I  do  not  think  that  Keble  was  ever,  properly  speaking,  a  mystic, 
nor  were  any  of  the  leaders  of  the  Anglican  movement.  It  therefore  hardly 
comes  within  the  province  of  this  work  to  dwell  upon  the  subject.  In  my 
opinion,  the  best  description  of  mysticism  (to  define  it  is  impossible)  is  that 
its  aim  is  Omnia  videre  in  Deo — Deum  videre  in  omnibus.  Perhaps  1 
may  be  allowed  to  refer  the  reader  who  desires  to  know  my  views  on  the 
matter  to  chapters  x.  xi.  and  xii.  in  William  Law,  Nonjuror  and  Mystic, 
pp.  140-220,  which  at  any  rate  give  them  fully  enough. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  97 

was  as  ugly  a  word  as  **  reserve",  especially  when 
used  by  a  leader  of  a  party  which  was  charged  with 
concealing  what  it  really  meant.  Having  first  ad- 
mitted that  they  were  **  reserving",  or  keeping 
back  some  of  the  whole  counsel  of  God,  they  now 
frankly  j^ustified  the  ** mystification"  of  their  readers. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  Keble  did  nothing  of  the  kind ; 
he  explained  and  justified  the  (so-called)  mystical 
interpretation  (i)  of  Holy  Scripture,  (2)  of  Nature. 
*'The  invisible  things  of  Him  from  the  creation  of 
the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  understood  by  the 
things  that  are  made  ",  was  virtually  the  text  of  the 
later  and  more  important  part  of  his  treatise — for  a 
treatise  it  was,  not  a  tract.  It  is,  in  fact,  an  amplifi- 
cation of,  and  comment  on  the  hymn  for  Septua- 
gesima  Sunday  in  The  Christian  Year^  against 
which  no  exception  had  ever  been  taken.  But 
Dean  Church  calls  it  an  ** inopportune"  tract ;^  and 
the  epithet  is  singularly  appropriate  in  its  literal 
sense,  for  at  that  day  it  was  not  likely  to  be  attrac- 
tive to  either  friend  or  foe.  The  time  was  not  ripe 
for  such  refined  and  subtle,  though  perfectly  inno- 
cuous speculations.  "It  is",  says  Mr.  Lock,  most 
truly,*  **a  poet*s  protest  against  a  prosaic  age, 
pleading  for  the  beauty  and  fulness  of  life."  But 
a  prosaic  age  does  not  like  being  protested  against, 
and  refused  to  listen  to  the  pleading.  The  tract 
produced  no  immediate  effect  in  the  direction  which 

*  The  Oxford  Movement,  ch.  xiii,  p.  229. 
«  Lock's  John  Keble,  p.  loi. 
(11420)  O 


98  The  Anglican  Revival. 

its  writer  desired,  and  only  succeeded  in  swelling 
the  outcry,  already  sufficiently  loud,  against  the 
party  from  which  it  emanated.  Also,  like  his  disciple, 
Isaac  Williams,  Keble  did  not  hesitate  to  express 
pretty  plainly  his  low  opinion  of  the  popular  reli- 
gion of  the  period;  and  the  period  did  not  relish 
such  plain  speaking.  If  Keble's  object  had  been 
to  please  the  popular  taste  (which  it  was  not,  and 
never  was),  he  might  have  taken  warning  by  the 
fate  of  another  whom  he  much  admired — William 
Law,  who  lost  all  his  popularity  when  he  became  ''a 
mystic  writer ".  And  once  more,  a  time  of  bitter 
controversy  was  not  a  time  in  which  mysticism 
could  ever  find  favour.  Again  to  quote  Mr.  Lock: 
**  It  would  have  been  difficult  for  these  views  to  win 
ready  acceptance  at  any  time,  most  of  all  in  Oxford 
in  the  beginning  of  1841.  A  nightingale  might  as 
soon  have  expected  to  be  listened  to  on  a  field  of 
battle."! 

But  the  alarm  caused  by  No.  89  paled  into  in- 
significance before  that  which  arose  on  the  appear- 
ance of  its  successor.  Tract  No.  90,  **  Remarks 
on  certain  Passages  in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles", 
is  dated  **The  Conversion  of  S.  Paul,  1841  ", 
and  was  published  on  February  27.  The  writer 
was  Newman,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
his  perfect  good  faith  when  he  declares  that 
he  wrote  it  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  waverers 
within  the  fold  of  the  English  Church.     His  aim 

>  Lock's  John  Keble,  ch.  iv.  p.  102. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  99 

was  to  show  that  the  Articles,  though  **the  product 
of  an  un-CathoHc  age",  were  **  patient  of  a  CathoHc 
interpretation  ".  He  certainly  did  not  advocate,  as 
he  has  been  charged  with  doing,  their  acceptance 
in  a  non-natural  sense.  He  would  take  them  in 
their  plain,  grammatical  sense,  but  not  necessarily 
in  the  sense  of  their  writers,  still  less  in  the  sense 
which  the  later  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent 
might  suggest.  *'The  main  thesis",  he  says,  **of 
my  essay  was  this:  The  Articles  do  not  oppose 
Catholic  teaching;  they  but  partially  oppose  Roman 
dogma;  they  for  the  most  part  oppose  the  dominant 
errors  of  Rome.  And  the  problem  was  to  draw  the 
line  as  to  what  they  allowed  and  what  they  con- 
demned."^ He  works  out  his  case  with  great 
ingenuity  and  not  a  little  special  pleading;  but 
many  of  his  positions  which  were  at  the  time  fiercely 
assailed — notably  his  historical  view  of  the  Articles 
as  **  Articles  of  Peace  " — are  now  generally  adopted 
by  competent  theologians.  Like  all  his  writings 
since  1837,  the  Tract  leaves  an  uncomfortable  im- 
pression that  the  writer  was  dissatisfied  with  his 
own  position.  Thus,  it  was  not  reassuring  to  be 
told  to  go  on  teaching,  **  if  only  with  the  stammer- 
ing lips  of  ambiguous  formularies  and  inconsistent 
precedents  and  principles  partially  developed ". 
But  nothing  like  evasion  or  moral  dishonesty  can 
be  fairly  predicated  of  it.  Some  years  before,  he 
had  maintained  that  a  certain  latitude  must  be  given 

^  Apologia,  p.  79. 


loo  The  Anglican  Revival. 

to  the  interpretation  of  the  formularies  of  the  church ; 
otherwise  they  would  press  at  least  as  heavily  upon 
Liberals  and  Evangelicals  as  upon  High  Church- 
men. **Two  can  play  at  that",  he  would  say,  when 
the  latter  were  accused  of  acting  inconsistently  with 
those  formularies.  But  in  this  case  he  would  not 
have  admitted  that  he  claimed  any  latitude.  He 
maintained  that  his  views  were  perfectly  consistent 
with  the  plain,  literal  meaning  of  the  Articles,  though 
not  with  the  popular  gloss  upon  that  meaning. 
Whether  he  was  right  or  wrong  is  another  question ; 
all  that  is  maintained  is,  that  he  was  not  shuffling 
or  disingenuous.  But  the  way  in  which  he  was 
treated  would  certainly  imply  that  he  was.  Four 
senior  tutors,  Mr.  Tait  of  Balliol,  Mr.  Churton  of 
Brasenose,  Mr.  Wilson  of  S.  John's,  and  Mr. 
Griffiths  of  Wadham  (with  Mr.  Golightly  in  the 
background,  probably,  urging  them  on),  wrote  a 
**  Letter"  to  the  editor  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  ^ 
asking  for  the  name  of  the  writer,  and  asserting 
that  the  Tract  suggested  and  opened  a  way  by  which 
men  might,  at  least  in  the  case  of  Roman  views, 
violate  their  solemn  engagements  to  the  University. 
Newman  at  once  admitted  that  he  himself  was  the 
writer,  and  began  to  prepare  his  defence,  which 
took  the  form  of  a  '*  Letter  to  Dr.  Jelf  ".  But  mean- 
while the  Heads  of  Houses  took  the  matter  up  on 
their  own  account ;  and  appointed  a  committee 
which  drew  up  a  resolution  that  **  modes  of  inter- 
pretation, such  as  are  suggested  in  the  said  Tract. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.         •  •  ioi 

evading  rather  than  explaining  the  sense  of  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  reconciling  subscription 
to  them  with  the  adoption  of  errors  which  they  are 
designed  to  counteract,  defeat  the  object,  and  are 
inconsistent  with  the  due  observance  of  the  statutes 
which  require  subscription  to  the  Articles  ".  This 
document  was  posted  on  the  buttery-hatches  of  the 
various  colleges,  for  the  benefit  of  undergraduates. 

It  will  be  seen  that  both  the  four  tutors  and  the 
Heads  impute  not  only  error,  but  palpable  dis- 
honesty to  the  writer  of  the  Tract.  But  even  this 
was  not  all.  The  mere  dates  of  the  rapid  sequence 
of  events  show  that  matters  were  pushed  on  with 
indecent  haste.  The  Tract  was  published  on  Feb- 
ruary 27,  the  "  Letter  of  the  Four  Tutors  "  was  sent 
on  March  8,  the  Vice-chancellor  laid  the  Tract  be- 
fore the  Board  of  Heads  on  March  10,  and  the 
Resolution  was  passed  on  March  15,  without  wait- 
ing for  Newman's  defence,  which  actually  appeared 
on  the  very  next  day,  March  16 1 

Perhaps  allowance  must  be  made  for  the  heated 
atmosphere  of  Oxford  at  the  time.  But  outside  the 
University  not  only  did  Newman's  friends  rally 
round  him,  but  men  who  had  strongly  disapproved 
of  some  of  his  doings  were  drawn  towards  him  by 
the  Englishman's  love  of  fairness.  Dr.  Hook,  who 
had  never  identified  himself  with  the  movement, 
was  **  indignant  at  the  Hebdomadal  Board  taking 
upon  itself  to  exercise  judicial  powers  which  pro- 
perly belonged  to  the  University  at  large,  and  at  the 


102  The  Anglican  Revival. 

offensive  terms  in  which  its  sentence  was  expressed".^ 
So  was  Mr.  Palmer,  who  was  perhaps  still  more 
actively  opposed  to  Newman  on  many  points.  So 
was  Mr.  Perceval.  The  judicial  mind  of  Sir  J.  T. 
Coleridge  revolted  against  the  unjudicial  way  in 
which  it  had  all  been  done.  John  Keble,  with 
characteristic  chivalry,  wrote  at  once  declaring  that 
the  Tract  had  been  submitted  to  him  before  publi- 
cation, and  had  met  with  his  warmest  approval. 
Pusey  also  wrote  in  defence  of  his  friend,  though 
he  by  no  means  agreed,  as  Keble  did,  with  New- 
man's views  on  the  point;  for  in  this  as  in  other 
matters  Newman  and  Keble  were  much  in  advance 
of  Pusey.  On  the  other  hand,  Ward  was  much  in 
advance  both  of  Newman  and  Keble;  but  he  wrote 
two  very  moderate  pamphlets  in  Newman's  defence 
entitled,  ''A  Few  Words",  and  *^A  Few  Words 
More". 

Men,  again,  who  had  any  real  knowledge  of 
history  perceived  at  once  that  Newman  had  much 
to  say  on  his  side.  This  was  the  case  with  Palmer, 
and  also  with  J.  B.  Mozley,  who  was  now  fast 
coming  to  the  front,  and  who  wrote  in  a  private 
letter  to  his  sister  most  pertinently:  **  A  new  tract 
has  come  out  this  last  week  which  is  beginning  to 
make  a  sensation.  It  is  on  the  Articles,  and  shows 
that  they  bear  a  highly  Catholic  meaning,  and  that 
many  doctrines  of  which  the  Romanist  are  corrup- 
tions, may  be  held  consistently  with  them.     This 

1  See  Stephens'  Life  of  Dean  Hook  (7th  ed.  in  i  vol),  p.  317. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  103 

is  no  more  than  what  we  know  as  a  matter  of  his- 
tory, for  the  Articles  were  expressly  worded  to  bring 
in  Roman  Catholics.  But  people  are  astonished 
and  confused  at  the  idea  now,  as  if  it  was  quite 
new."^  But  the  most  astonishing  thing  of  all  was 
that  EXr.  Routh,  the  venerable  president  of  Mag- 
dalen, who  held  quite  aloof  from  the  movement,  or, 
indeed,  from  any  movement,  emerged  from  his 
obscurity  and  protested  very  strongly,  ^^  of  course 
in  writing,  for  he  never  goes  near  them  himself 'V 
against  the  resolution  of  his  brother  Heads.  His 
profound  learning  showed  him  at  once  that  they 
were  wrong.  Some  whom  outsiders  would  hardly 
have  suspected  as  likely  to  take  an  interest  in  such 
a  matter,  entered  the  lists;  Mr. -Monckton  Milnes, 
the  poet  and  society  man,  but  one  who  took  a  keen 
interest  in  theology,  published  a  pamphlet  entitled 
**One  Tract  More",  in  defence  of  Newman,  who 
gratefully  acknowledged  his  kindness  in  the  Apo- 
logia;^ and  on  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Robert  Lowe, 
of  all  men  in  the  world,  attacked  the  Tract  on  the 
ground  of  bad  faith  and  immorality. 

Great  surprise  has  been  expressed  that  Newman 
himself  was  quite  unprepared  for  the  storm  which 
the  Tract  created.  But  may  not  this  be  accounted 
for  by  his  knowledge  of  theology?  Without  having 
anything  like  the  deep  and  wide  reading  of  Routh 
and  Pusey,  he  was  a  well-read  man,  and  may  well 

«  Utters  of  J.  B.  Motley,  p.  112.  * /d  ,  p.  116. 

*  Note  at  the  end  of  Apologia,  ch.  iL 


104  The  Anglican  Revival. 

have  supposed  that  a  learned  university  would  at 
least  have  recognized  the  intellectual  strength  of  his 
position,  however  much  it  might  disapprove  of  his 
views.  He  would,  however,  probably  have  taken 
little  heed  of  what  either  the  University  or  the  outside 
world  said ;  but  an  intimation  came  to  him  from  one 
whose  lightest  word  was  law  to  him,  his  own 
diocesan,  that  the  Tracts  had  better  cease.  Newman 
at  once  complied  with  Bishop  Bagot's  request,  and 
No.  90  was  the  last  of  the  Tracts.  This  was  really 
all  that  was  done.  No.  90  was  never  withdrawn 
from  circulation;  it  was  never  condemned  by  the 
University  as  a  body ;  Newman  himself  was  never 
precluded  from  any  office,  academical  or  clerical. 
**But",  he  says,  *'I  saw  clearly  that  my  place  in 
the  movement  was  lost;  public  confidence  was  at 
an  end;  my  occupation  was  gone.  It  was  simply 
an  impossibility  that  I  could  say  anything  hence- 
forth to  good  effect,  when  I  had  been  posted  up  by 
the  marshal  on  the  buttery-hatch  of  every  college  of 
my  University,  after  the  manner  of  discommoned 
pastry-cooks,  and  when  in  every  part  of  the  country 
and  every  class  of  society,  through  every  organ  and 
opportunity  of  opinion,  in  newspapers,  in  periodi- 
cals, at  meetings,  in  pulpits,  at  dinner-tables,  in 
coffee-rooms,  in  railway-carriages,  I  was  denounced 
as  a  traitor  who  had  laid  his  train  and  was  detected 
in  the  very  act  of  firing  it  against  the  time-honoured 
Establishment."  ^    He  was  troubled  also  by  the  fact 

"^Apologia,  p.  89. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  105 

that  some  who  called  themselves  his  disciples  would 
go  ahead  of  their  leader,  or  try  to  force  his  hand. 
And,  worst  of  all,  his  own  mind  became  more  and 
more  unsettled.  He  accordingly  withdrew  himself 
by  degrees  from  public  notice,  and  in  February, 
1842,  retired  to  Littlemore,  which  was  part  of  the 
parish  of  S.  Mary's,  retaining  his  living  until  Sep- 
tember 18,  1843. 

Meanwhile  the  enemies  of  the  movement  at* 
Oxford,  emboldened  by  their  success,  went  on 
triumphantly  in  their  crusade.  In  the  autumn  of 
1 84 1  John  Keble  resigned  the  Poetry  Professorship 
which  he  had  held  for  ten  years.  One  man  stood 
prominently  forward  as  his  natural  successor.  Isaac 
Williams  had  every  qualification  for  the  post  but 
one.  He  had  been  a  resident  Fellow  and  Tutor  of 
Trinity;  he  was  of  unblemished  character,  and  the 
last  man  in  the  world  to  make  enemies  who  would 
oppose  him  on  personal  grounds;  he  had  won  his 
spurs  in  the  domain  of  poetry,  having  already 
published  The  Cathedraly  Thoughts  in  Past  YearSy 
and  Hymns  translated  from  the  Parisian  Breviary  \  in 
fact,  as  a  sacred  poet  he  stood  second  only  to  Keble; 
and  in  those  days,  when  Oxford  was  an  exclusively 
religious  university,  the  epithet  ** sacred"  should 
have  counted  for  something.  Moreover,  he  had  all 
the  advantage  of  the  warm  support  of  the  outgoing 
professor,  who  had  a  claim  upon  the  electors,  as 
having  himself  held  the  office  with  conspicuous 
success;    **but  he  was  a  leper" — he  was  tainted 


io6  The  Anglican  Revival. 

with  the  scrofula  of  what  now  began  to  be  called 
"Puseyism".  Worse  still,  he  had  been  the  inti- 
mate friend  and  coadjutor  of  Newman  at  S.  Mary's. 
Worst  of  all,  he  had  been  the  writer  of  the  most 
obnoxious  of  all  the  Tracts  except  No.  90. 

The  candidate  put  forth  against  Mr.  Williams 
was  Mr.  Garbett,  of  Brasenose,  an  accomplished 
man  and  a  first-classman,  but  one  who  had  never 
had  the  faintest  connection  with  poetry,  either  as  a 
poet  or  a  critic.  A  contest  was  avoided  by  a  com- 
parison of  votes,  which  showed  that  there  would  be 
921  for  Mr.  Garbett  and  only  621  for  Mr.  Williams. 
This  was  the  first  public  defeat  of  the  movement  in 
the  place  of  its  birth.  It  took  place  in  January, 
1842. 

It  was  followed  in  the  same  year  by  another 
attack  upon  the  party,  which  was  temporarily 
successful.  Mr.  Macmullen,  a  Fellow  of  Corpus 
Christi  College,  and  a  well-known  Tractarian,  had 
by  the  statutes  of  his  college  to  take  his  B.D. 
degree  in  due  course  if  he  would  retain  his  place 
among  the  Fellows.  Before  doing  so  he  had  to  go 
through  what  were  called  ''the  exercises  for  the 
degree" — that  is,  he  had  to  defend  two  theses, 
which  were  generally  selected  by  the  candidate 
himself  and  approved  by  the  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity.  The  professor  was  Dr.  Hampden,  who 
sent  Mr.  Macmullen  two  theses  to  defend  which  no 
conscientious  Tractarian  could  defend.  Mr.  Mac- 
mullen (as  we  shall  see  presently)  was  the  last  man 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  107 

tamely  to  submit  to  such  an  indignity.  The 
Gordian  knot  was  cut  by  the  vice-chancellor,  who 
on  his  own  responsibility  stopped  the  degree,  which, 
however,  after  much  litigation,  Mr.  Macmullen  at 
last  succeeded  in  obtaining.  The  incident  had  no 
ultimate  importance,  but  it  is  significant  as  being 
one  instance  out  of  many  of  the  dogged  determina- 
tion at  all  hazards  to  quash  the  movement. 

But  in  1843  its  opponents  flew  at  higher  game. 
On  May  24  Dr.  Pusey  preached  a  university  sermon 
on  **The  Holy  Eucharist  as  a  Comfort  to  the 
Penitent ".  It  will  be  best  to  give  his  own  account 
of  the  reason  why  he  chose  the  subject:  "When 
people  said  that  I  had  scared  them  about  post- 
baptismal  sin  " — that  is,  in  Nos.  67,  68,  and  69  in 
Tracts  for  the  Times — "  I  was  led  to  preach  a  course 
of  sermons  on  *  Comforts  to  the  Penitent  \  Of  these 
the  sermon  on  the  Holy  Eucharist  was  one.  It  was 
a  singular  case  of  mistaking  what  people's  feelings 
would  be.  For  I  chose  the  Holy  Eucharist  as  the 
subject  at  which  they  would  be  less  likely  to  take 
offence  than  at  Absolution.  But  we  know  what 
happened."^ 

What  did  happen  was  this.  The  Margaret  Pro- 
fessor of  Divinity,  Dr.  Faussett,  a  vehement  anti- 
Tractarian,  requested  the  vice-chancellor  to  take 
measures  for  putting  in  force  the  statute  De  con- 
cionibus.  That  statute  provided  that  when  a  sermon 
was  *' delated"  to  the  vice-chancellor  for  heresy,  he 

'  See  Liddon's  Life  0/  Pusey,  ii.  307. 


io8  The  Anglican  Revival. 

should  demand  a  copy  of  it,  summon  six  Doctors  of 
Divinity  as  his  assessors,  and  if  the  sermon  should 
be  found  to  contain  heresy,  condemn  and  punish 
the  preacher.  The  vice-chancellor,  Dr.  Wynter, 
President  of  S.  John's,  accordingly  demanded  the 
sermon,  and  appointed  as  his  assessors  to  sit  with 
him  in  judgment  upon  it,  Drs.  Faussett,  Hawkins, 
Symons,  Jenkyns,  Ogilvie,  and  Jelf.  Of  these  the 
first  was  the  very  man  who  had  delated  the  sermon ; 
but  Dr.  Wynter  justified  the  choice  on  the  ground 
that  the  Regius  Professor  (Dr.  Hampden)  was 
disqualified  by  the  disabling  statute  of  1836,^  and 
the  Margaret  Professor  acted  in  his  place  as  a 
matter  of  course ;  the  second  was  one  who  was  at 
complete  variance  with  his  Oriel  friends  on  the 
subject  of  the  movement;  the  third  was  the  leader 
of  the  small  Evangelical  party  at  Oxford;  the  fourth, 
as  Master  of  Balliol,  was  being  worried  out  of  his 
life  by  that  most  eccentric  of  Tractarians,  W.  G. 
Ward,  Fellow  of  Balliol;  the  fifth  had  not  committed 
himself  to  any  side;  and  the  sixth  was  a  rather  timid 
High  Churchman.  Before  such  a  tribunal  the  issue 
of  the  inquiry  was  of  course  a  foregone  conclusion. 
But  the  details  of  the  transaction — what  were  the 
incriminated  passages  of  the  sermon — what  were 
the  sentiments  if  any  of  the  seven  divines  assembled 
in  conclave,  are  profound  secrets  to  this  day.  The 
statute  indeed  did  not  require  that  there  should  be 
any  publication  of  the  charges,  or  any  defence  on  the 

1  See  supra,  pp.  72,  73. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  109 

part  of  the  accused,  though  it  left  it  open  to  allow 
both.  Dr.  Pusey  in  vain  requested  the  vice-chan- 
cellor to  ** choose  that  course  allowed  by  the  statute, 
which  permits  the  accused  to  answer  for  himself".^ 
Even  the  sentence  of  the  vice-chancellor  was  never 
formally,  announced;  but  it  came  out  that  that  sen- 
tence was  that  Dr.  Pusey  was  **  guilty  of  preaching 
certain  things  dissonant  from,  and  contrary  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  'V  ^^^  that  he 
was  suspended  from  preaching  within  the  Univer- 
sity for  two  years. 

The  whole  proceedings  were  more  like  those  of  a 
mediaeval  Wehmgericht  than  of  an  English  court 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  though  no  doubt  they 
were  all  according  to  the  letter  of  the  statute.  We 
turn  in  vain  to  the  sermon  itself  to  discover  what 
were  the  heretical  passages.  It  might  have  been 
preached  by  any  of  the  great  Caroline  divines;  for 
there  is  nothing  in  it  which  had  not  been  previously 
expressed  by  them,  and  which  is  not  amply  covered 
by  the  writings  of  the  early  Fathers.  If  it  were  not 
singularly  unlike  the  general  character  of  Pusey, 
one  might  have  fancied  that  there  was  a  cutting 
irony  in  his  reply  to  the  vice-chancellor's  demand 
for  the  sermon:  '*I  would  have  sent  you  the  sermon, 
but  I  thought  it  might  save  trouble  if  I  were  to  add 
some  references  in  some  places  to  mark  that  I  was 
using  the  language  of  the  Fathers,  not  my  own  ". 

*  Li/e  cf  Pusey,  ii.  317. 

*  "  Qiuedam  doctrinse  Ecclesiae  Anglicanse  disaona  et  contraria." 


no  The  Anglican  Revival. 

But,  being  what  he  was,  he  probably  meant  just 
what  he  said,  viz.  that  he  really  wished  to  save  his 
judges  trouble,  and  prevent  them  from  falling  into 
ludicrous  errors.  **  I  thought  this  best,"  he  writes 
with  characteristic  simplicity  to  a  friend,  ''that  they 
might  not  be  exposed  unconsciously  to  condemn, 
e.g.  S.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  when  they  thought  they 
were  only  condemning  me."^  There  is  an  interest- 
ing letter  of  James  Mozley — a  cool  observer — which 
shows  how  it  appeared  to  a  contemporary  who 
probably  heard  it:  ''It  was  one  of  Pusey's  sermons, 
and  therefore  of  course  contained  high  doctrinal 
views;  the  audience  recognized  that  fact,  went  home, 
were  perfectly  at  their  ease,  thought  nothing  more 
about  it, — the  reverential  impression  excepted,  of 
course,  which  that  preacher's  discourses  always 
leave  upon  the  mind;  when  all  on  a  sudden  comes, 
like  a  clap  of  thunder  on  the  ear,  the  news  that 
the  Board  of  Heresy  is  summoned  to  sit  on  Dr. 
Pusey".2 

But  the  matter  was  not  allowed  to  rest.  First 
came  an  address  to  the  vice-chancellor  signed  by 
sixty-one  resident  members  of  Convocation  and 
B.C.L.'s,  asking  him  to  make  known  to  the  Univer- 
sity the  grounds  on  which  sentence  on  Pusey  was 
passed;  and  then  one  from  nen-residents,  including 
such  names  as  those  of  Mr.  Gladstone  and  Sir  J. 
T.  Coleridge,  which  said  more  boldly,  "We  depre- 
cate that  construction  of  the  statute  under  which 

1  Life,  ii.  311  and  312.  '  Quoted  in  Pusey's  Life,  ii.  309. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  1 1 1 

Dr.  Pusey  has  been  condemned,  which,  contrary  to 
the  general  principles  of  justice,  subjects  a  person 
to  penalties  without  affording  him  the  means  of 
explanation  or  defence".  Coleridge's  judicial  mind 
was  again  outraged,  as  it  had  been  in  the  case  of 
No.  90,  and  he  wrote  to  the  vice-chancellor  in  1844: 
**  My  conduct  proceeded  and  proceeds  on  the  most 
undoubting  conviction  that  the  course  pursued  was 
not  only  cruel  to  him  and  radically  unjust  in  prin- 
ciple, but  most  dangerous  to  the  church  ".  I.  Wil- 
liams was  particularly  shocked;  ** Pusey",  he  says, 
"  is  the  one  of  all  others  least  inclined  to  secede  to 
Rome". 

As  to  Dr.  Pusey  himself,  he  accepted  the  sentence 
with  that  meekness  which  was  one  of  his  most 
distinguishing  characteristics,  quietly  waiting  until 
the  expiry  of  the  period  of  his  suspension. 

To  understand  how  the  next — and  last — conflict 
between  the  Oxford  writers  and  the  Oxford  autho- 
rities arose,  we  must  go  back  a  year  or  two.  In 
1841  Newman  gave  up  the  editorship  of  the  British 
Critic^  and  his  brother-in-law,  Thomas  Mozley, 
undertook  it.  The  writers,  freed  from  the  restrain- 
ing hand  of  Newman,  began  to  run  riot  in  distinctly 
Roman  articles,  chiefly  the  product  of  Mr.  Ward 
and  Mr.  Oakeley.  Palmer  remonstrated  on  the 
subject  with  Newman,  who,  he  says,  ''replied  under 
evident  excitement,  and  in  a  spirit  which  was  new 
to  me.  He  said  that  he  was  no  longer  editor  of 
the  British  Critic;  that  it  had  passed  under  different 


112  The  Anglican  Revival. 

control;  that  the  heads  of  the  church  had  thought 
fit  to  condemn  him  and  to  destroy  his  usefulness; 
that  they  had  silenced  him,  and  that  they  would 
now  have  to  deal  with  younger  men,  whom  it  was 
not  in  his  power  to  restrain;  that  they  would  in 
future  have  to  deal  with  a  different  class  of  men. 
He  finally  declared  his  resolution  not  to  interfere."^ 
Foiled  in  this  direction.  Palmer  wrote  a  pamphlet 
on  his  own  account,  which  gave,  as  the  title  ex- 
presses it,  *' A  Narrative  of  Events  connected  with 
the  publication  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times^  with 
reflections  on  existing  tendencies  to  Romanism, 
and  on  the  present  duties  and  prospects  of  the 
members  of  the  church".  No  one  had  a  better 
right  to  give  such  an  account,  for  he  had  been  a 
prime  mover,  though  the  movement  took  a  direction 
of  which  he  did  not  wholly  approve.  The  object 
of  the  Narrative  is  to  show  that  the  later  develop- 
ment, as  represented  by  the  British  Critic^  was 
totally  contrary  to  the  original  intention;  and  the 
point  aimed  at  is  proved  beyond  possibility  of  doubt. 
The  pamphlet  was  read  and  approved  before  it  was 
printed  by  Dr.  Bagot,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  to  whom 
it  is  dedicated;  but  the  bishop  objected  to  the  inser- 
tion of  letters  of  censure  on  the  Romanizing  party, 
which  the  writer  had  received  from  **  leading  church- 
men" to  whom  he  had  shown  the  manuscript,  and 

*  Narrative,  &c.,  p.  ^^.  Pusey  also  remonstrated  with  Newman,  and 
apparently  with  a  little  better  effect,  for  he  writes,  Aug.  9,  1841,  "It  is  a 
great  relief  to  me  that  you  mean  to  urge  Oakeley  and  Ward  to  be  quiet ". 
See  Life  of  Pusey,  ii,  218  and  225. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  113 

which  he  had  inserted  in  the  Preface.  The  bishop 
thought,  perhaps  rightly,  that  to  print  them  would 
only  tend  to  drive  waverers  to  Rome;  but  their 
omission  is  a  loss,  as  the  testimony  given  in  them 
might  have  emphasized  a  point  which  ought  never 
to  be  forgotten,  viz.  that  the  Roman  party  was 
only  a  small  clique,  while  the  main  body  of  church- 
men were  absolutely  loyal  to  the  English  Church. 

Almost  simultaneously  with  the  publication  of 
the  Narrative^  that  is,  in  the  autumn  of  1843,  the 
British  Critic  became  defunct;  so  the  writers  could 
not  defend  themselves  in  their  own  organ.  But  it 
was  understood  that  Mr.  Ward  was  preparing  an 
answer;  and  this  answer  appeared  in  the  summer 
of  1844,  not  in  the  form  of  a  pamphlet  like  Mr. 
Palmer's,  but  of  a  bulky  volume  of  600  pages, 
entitled.  The  Ideal  of  a  Christian  Church  cojisidered 
in  Comparison  with  Existing  Parties,  Mr.  Palmer 
had  awaited  with  some  nervousness  the  appearance 
of  a  work  in  which  he  expected  at  least  some 
attempt,  on  the  part  of  a  very  able  man  and  acute 
logician,  to  defend  himself  against  the  charges  of 
the  Narrative^  and  it  is  amusing  to  observe  with 
what  mingled  feelings  of  relief,  amazement,  and 
perhaps  a  little  disappointment,  he  found  that  there 
was  no  attempt  of  the  kind.  He  was  an  Irishman, 
and  did  not  dislike  the  idea  of  a  combat — especially 
a  combat  for  which  he  felt  himself  armed  at  all 
points.  But  Mr.  Ward  admitted  the  truth  of  all 
the  imputations.    There  was  no  combat  at  all.    Mr. 

(11426)  H 


114  T^^  Anglican  Revival. 

Palmer  had  nothing  more  to  do;  The  Ideal  of  a 
Christian  Church  was  quite  different  from  the  Eng- 
lish Church;  the  Roman  approached  far  more 
nearly  to  it.  Mr.  Ward  was  regarded  as  a  disciple 
of  Mr.  Newman;  but  The  Ideal  shows  that  the  dis- 
ciple far  outstripped  the  master.  Mr.  Newman  did 
not  advocate  subscription  to  the  Articles  in  a  non- 
natural  sense;  but  Mr.  Ward  did.  ''Our  nth 
Article  is  as  plain  as  words  can  make  it  on  the 
Evangelical  side;  of  course  I  think  its  natural  mean- 
ing may  be  explained  away,  for  I  subscribe  it  my- 
self in  a  non-natural  sense"  (p.  479).  Mr.  Newman 
had  criticised  very  carefully  and  temperately  the 
Lutheran  doctrine  of  justification;  but  Mr.  Ward 
*'  had  the  greatest  satisfaction  in  reflecting  that  he 
had  ventured  to  characterize  that  hateful  and  fearful 
type  of  Antichrist  in  terms  not  wholly  inadequate 
to  its  prodigious  demerits"  (p.  305).  And  as  to  Mr. 
Palmer,  he  need  not  have  troubled  himself  to  prove 
elaborately  that  there  was  a  Roman  party  in  the 
church.  It  is  admitted  without  proof.  '*  We  find, 
oh!  most  joyful,  most  wonderful,  most  unexpected 
sight,  we  find  the  whole  cycle  of  Roman  doctrine 
gradually  possessing  numbers  of  English  Church- 
men "  (p.  565).  As  to  the  writer  himself:  ''Three 
years",  he  says,  "have  passed  since  I  said  plainly 
that  in  subscribing  the  Articles  I  renounced  no 
Roman  doctrine,  yet  I  retain  my  fellowship,  which  I 
held  on  the  tenure  of  subscription,  and  have  received 
no  ecclesiastical  censure  in  any  shape  "  (p.  567). 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  115 

But  it  was  scarcely  likely  that  after  such  exceed- 
ingly frank  avowals  he  would  escape  censure  much 
longer;  and  it  is  not  surprising  that,  as  soon  as  the 
October  term  began,  the  Board  of  Heads  appointed 
a  committee  to  examine  the  book,  and  that  in  De- 
cember they  announced  that  they  were  going  to 
submit  to  Convocation  three  measures.  These 
measures  were:  (i)  to  condemn  Mr.  Ward's  book; 
(2)  to  degrade  Mr.  Ward  by  depriving  him  of  all  his 
University  degrees;  and  (3)  whereas  the  existing 
statutes  gave  the  vice-chancellor  power  of  calling 
any  member  of  the  University  at  any  time  to  prove 
his  orthodoxy  by  subscribing  the  Articles,  to  add  to 
this  a  declaration,  to  be  henceforth  made  by  the 
subscriber,  that  he  took  them  in  the  sense  in  which 
they  were  both  first  published  and  were  now  imposed 
by  the  University,  with  the  penalty  of  expulsion 
against  any  one,  lay  or  clerical,  who  thrice  refused 
subscription  with  this  declaration.^ 

The  last  measure  was  abandoned  in  consequence 
of  an  outcry  being  raised  against  it  as  imposing  a 
new  test,  but  another  measure  was  introduced  in  its 
place  containing  a  formal  censure  of  the  No.  90  of 
four  years  ago! 

On  Feb.  13,  1845,  in  the  roughest  of  weather,  the 
Convocation  met  in  the  Sheldonian  Theatre.  There 
was  no  speaking  except  the  address  of  Mr.  Ward, 
who  obtained  leave  to  speak  in  English.  His  "de- 
fence" was  merely  a  reiteration  of  the  principles  he 

*  Dean  Church,  The  Oxford  Movement,  ch.  xviiL  p.  326-7. 


ii6  The  Anglican  Revival. 

had  advocated  in  the  British  Critic  and  The  Ideal, 
Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley,  who  was  present,  declares  that 
**  he  said  twenty  times  in  the  course  of  his  speech, 
*  I  believe  all  the  articles  of  the  Roman  Church'".^ 
Then  came  the  voting.  The  first  measure,  for  con- 
demning the  book,  was  carried  by  777  against  386; 
the  second,  for  degrading  the  writer,  by  569  against 
511;  but  when  it  came  to  the  third  measure,  for 
censuring  No.  90,  the  proctors  exercised  their  privi- 
lege of  'veto^  and  therefore  no  vote  was  taken. 

Meanwhile  the  great  leader  himself,  to  whom  so 
many  eyes  had  been  turned,  was  in  retirement  at 
Littlemore — his  Torres  Vedras — only  desirous  of 
being  left  alone  that  he  might  work  out  the  vital 
question  between  himself  and  his  God.  But  this 
was  just  what  he  was  not  allowed  to  do.  For  years 
he  had  been  too  conspicuous  an  object  of  reverence 
to  friends,  and  of  suspicion  to  foes,  to  be  allowed  to 
remain  quiet.  He  was  subjected  to  much  impertinent 
curiosity  of  men  who  wished  to  find  out  what  he 
was  doing  at  Littlemore.  **  Doing  there !"  he  writes 
indignantly;  *'have  I  not  retreated  from  you?  have 
I  not  given  up  my  position  and  my  place?  am  I 
alone,  of  Englishmen,  not  to  ha.ve  the  privilege  to 
go  where  I  will,  no  questions  asked?"^  His  position 
was  completely  misunderstood.  He  was  supposed 
to  have  made  up  his  mind,  when  he  had  really  not 
done  so.  Nay,  he  was  suspected  of  acting  the  part 
of  a  traitor  to  the  Church  whose  ministry  he  had 

1  Letters  of  J.  B.  Mozley,  p.  164.  2  Apologia,  p.  172. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  117 

abandoned)  though  he  still  remained  in  lay  com- 
munion, and  of  luring  on  others  away  from  her. 
But  instead  of  pushing  on  his  friends  Romewards, 
he  was  really  being  pushed  on  by  them,  driven  into 
a  corner,  forced  to  answer  questions  which  he  would 
have  much  preferred  not  to  have  been  asked.  From 
the  close  of  1841  he  had  been  on  his  deathbed  as 
regarded  his  membershipwith  the  Anglican  Church,^ 
but  the  death-struggle  was  a  very  long  and  linger- 
ing process. 

In  the  first  place,  though  he  was  dissatisfied 
with  England,  he  was  by  no  means  satisfied  with 
Rome.  Was  she  the  true  Church?  If  she  had 
the  note  of  Catholicity,  which  England  had  not, 
she  had  not  the  note  of  Antiquity,  which  England 
had.  He  was  in  a  strait  between  two:  he  could 
not  continue  his  ministry  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, if  he  was  not  allowed  to  hold  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  in  a  Catholic  sense.  He  could  not 
join  the  Church  of  Rome  if,  contrary  to  the  practice 
of  Antiquity,  she  paid  to  the  creature  the  worship 
due  solely  to  the  Creator.  Besides,  there  were 
personal  ties  which  detained  him  where  he  was. 
What  would  be  the  effect  of  his  desertion  upon  the 
disciples  who  hung  upon  his  words?  what  upon  the 
Oxford  that  he  knew  and  loved  so  well?  Might  it 
not  bring  in  that  very  Liberalism,  the  dread  of 
which  had  been  the  first  cause  of  the  whole  move- 
ment of  which  he  had  been  the  leader?    And  then 

*  Apologia,  beginning  of  ch.  iv. 


ii8  The  Anglican  Revival. 

there  were  closer  ties  still — those  which  bound  him 
to  his  own  family,  and  his  own  intimate  friends,  such 
as  Keble,  Pusey,  and  Marriott.  He  was  very  warm- 
hearted and  had  strong  family  affections;  nothing 
can  be  more  heart-rending  than  his  letters  addressed 
to  members  of  his  own  family  at  this  crisis  of  his  life. 
On  the  other  hand,  he  felt  that  he  had  been 
cast  off  by  his  own  Church ;  he  had  no  longer  any 
place  in  her;  the  Bishops,  for  whose  office  he  had 
intense  reverence,  had  charged  against  him ;  Oxford 
had  virtually  condemned  him.  Not  that  he  was  at 
all  affected  by  the  last  futile  attempt  of  the  Heads  to 
revive  the  odium  of  No.  90.  On  the  contrary,  he 
was  rather  disappointed  that  the  decree  did  not 
pass.  It  would  have  simplified  matters  and  smoothed 
the  way  towards  that  goal  which  everybody  (except 
Pusey,  who  hoped  against  hope  and  turned  a  deaf 
ear  to  Newman  himself)  saw  that  he  must  reach 
sooner  or  later.  Writing  to  Pusey  when  the  excite- 
ment about  Ward's  Ideal  was  at  its  height,  he  says : 
*'The  matter  now  going  on  has  not  given  me  a 
moment's  pain — nay,  or  interest".^  His  whole  mind 
was  engaged  in  ridding  himself  of  the  last  intel- 
lectual obstacle — the  others  were  sentimental,  and 
would  of  course  give  way  when  the  course  was 
made  plain — which  prevented  him  from  joining 
the  Church  of  Rome ;  that  is,  in  writing  his  Essay 
on  the  Development  of  Doctrine.  It  was  not  a  new 
subject  to  him;  he  had  already  preached  a  famous 

^  Pusey' s  Life,  ii.  429. 


Third  Stage  of  the  Movement.  119 

sermon  in  the  University  pulpit  about  it  in  1843 ;  and 
now,  he  employed  the  whole  of  1845  up  to  the  fatal 
October  in  elaborating  the  theory  which,  if  sound, 
would  dispose  of  the  difficulty  about  antiquity. 
**  Before  I  got  to  the  end",  he  writes  {Apologiay 
p.  366),  * '  I  resolved  to  be  received,  and  the  book 
remains  in  the  state  in  which  it  was  then,  unfinished"; 
and  he  adds  a  postscript  to  the  "Advertisement"  of 
the  work:  **  Since  the  above  was  written  the  author 
has  joined  the  Catholic  Church".  The  date  of  the 
*' Advertisement"  is  October  6,  and  on  October  10 
he  was  received  into  the  Roman  Church  by  Father 
Dominic,  the  Passionist.^  Some  had  preceded  him, 
many  followed  him,  but  the  other  two  members  of 
the  great  trio  were  absolutely  unmoved.  It  was 
personally  a  terrible  shock  both  to  Keble  and  Pusey, 
especially  to  Keble;  for,  curiously  enough,  Pusey, 
who  had  been  most  sanguine  about  retaining  him, 
bore  the  parting  best  when  it  actually  came.  The 
three  friends  met  once  again  at  a  later  day ;  but  they 
were  virtually  parted  for  ever  in  this  world,  and  the 
beautiful  lines  of  one  who  had  prepared  the  way  for 
their  work  in  the  English  Church,  are  applicable  to 
them  in  the  spirit,  if  not  in  the  letter: — 

"  They  parted — ne'er  to  meet  again ! 
But  never  either  found  another 

>See  R.  H.  Hutton's  Cardinal  Newman  (Eng.  Rel.  Leaders'  Series), 
p.  186.  Newman  {Apologia,  closing  part  of  ch.  iv.)  tells  us  that  he  wrote 
on  October  8  to  his  friends  that  he  was  expecting  Father  Dominic  that  night, 
but  Mr.  Hutton  gives  good  reason  for  thinking  that  October  lo  was  the 
actual  day  of  his  reception. 


I20  The  Anglican  Revival. 

To  free  the  hollow  heart  from  paining ; 
They  stood  aloof,  the  scars  remaining, 
Like  cliffs  which  had  been  rent  asunder".^ 

The  year  1845  saw  the  cpllapse  of  ''the  Oxford 
Movement"  in  one  sense;  that  is,  Oxford  was  no 
longer  the  centre  from  which  everything  issued  and 
to  which  everything  turned.  But  in  another  sense, 
the  movement,  so  far  from  having  suffered  collapse, 
was  spreading  and  strengthening  itself  in  all  direc- 
tions. So  it  is  not  the  melancholy  history  of  a 
''Decline  and  Fall  ",  but  the  joyous  history  of  a  con- 
tinuous advance  which  will  form  the  subject  of  the 
ensuing  chapters.  In  fact,  the  secession  of  a  number 
of  men  who  had  been  manifestly  tending  towards 
Rome  for  some  time,  was  really  a  relief  and  cause 
of  strength  to  those  who  still  remained  loyal  to  the 
English  Church.  It  was  the  bursting  of  the  storm 
which  cleared  the  air,  and  left  a  freer  scope  for  the 
development  of  those  principles  which  were  clogged 
and  hampered  by  the  nominal  adherence  of  those 
who  never  heartily  accepted  them.  The  true  Church 
of  England  was  not  a  thing  to  be  apologized  for, 
and  made  the  best  of,  but  a  thing  to  be  gloried  in, 
and  to  be  thankful  for;  and  it  was  soon  found  that 
all  except  a  small  minority,  who  had  been  more 
Roman  than  English  from  the  first,  accepted  it  as 
such. 

1  Coleridge's  Chrisiabel. 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        121 

Chapter  V. 
Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession. 

After  the  secession  of  Newman  there  could  be  no 
doubt  who  was  to  be  the  leader  of  the  movement. 
Indeed  that  matter  had  been  settled  long  before  by 
the  popular  voice.  The  party  had  been  called 
**  Puseyites",  not  *^  Newmanites",  for  some  years. 
The  title  may  have  partly  arisen  from  the  fact  that 
in  the  early  stage  Pusey  had  been  the  only  one  who 
had  given  the  clue  to  his  identity  by  attaching  his 
initials  to  his  Tract  on  Fasting,  and  signing  with 
his  full  name  a  letter  prefixed  to  a  later  Tract.  But 
there  is  a  sense  in  which  he  had  been  the  real  chief 
even  before  Newman's  secession.  It  was  he  who 
not  only  gave  the  new  shape  to  the  Tracts,  and 
revivified  them  when  they  were  in  extremis  in  1835, 
but  who  was  also  the  chief  agent  in  making  the  whole 
work  of  the  movement  more  solid,  substantial,  and 
learned.  After  the  catastrophe  there  could  be  no 
question  about  the  matter.  Mr.  Palmer  speaks  of 
him  as  **  the  self-constituted  leader  of  the  Tractarian 
party",*  and  so  in  a  way  he  was.  That  is  to  say,  he 
at  once  took  the  reins  into  his  own  hands,  and  pub- 
licly announced  himself  as  leader  of  the  scattered 
and  bewildered  forces.  But  those  little  understood 
the  true  character  of  Dr.  Pusey,  who  regarded  him 
on  that  account  as  a  Diotrephes,  *' who  loved  to  have 

^Narrative,  &c,  p.  340. 


122  The  Anglican  Revival. 

the  pre-eminence".  It  really  was  no  time  for  hesi- 
tation or  delay.  As  on  the  field  of  battle,  when  a 
leader  falls,  the  next  in  command  must  at  once  take 
his  place,  so  it  was  in  this  spiritual  battle-field. 
And  who  could  possibly  take  the  place  of  the  lost 
leader  except  Pusey? 

The  only  other  name  that  could  in  any  way  come 
into  competition  with  his  was  that  of  John  Keble. 
And  there  were  several  reasons  why  Keble  could 
not  occupy  the  vacant  post.  In  the  first  place,  he 
was  wedded  to  his  distant  Hursley,  which  he  had 
no  intention  of  leaving;  and  a  working  leader  of  a 
great  party,  who  buried  himself  in  a  remote  country 
village,  was  an  impossibility.  Again,  it  is  essential 
for  such  a  leader  to  be  absolutely  confident  of  his 
position ; — this  Pusey  was,  but  Keble  for  a  time  was 
noL  He  had  been  far  more  shaken  by  Newman's 
secession  than  Pusey  had  been;  he  never  thought 
of  following  Newman's  example,  but  he  did  think, 
for  a  time,  that  it  might  be  necessary  for  him  to 
adopt  some  such  attitude  as  that  of  the  Nonjurors, 
who  remained  the  staunchest  of  staunch  Churchmen, 
though  they  could  not  accept  the  Revolution  settle- 
ment, and  with  whom  he  always  had  a  strong  and 
hereditary  sympathy.  The  thought  was  merely  a 
passing  one,  but  while  it  lasted  it  naturally  disquali- 
fied its  holder  for  the  post  of  leader.  Once  more,  the 
time  required  emphatically,  not  so  much  a  fighter, 
as  a  leader  who  would  bring  out  the  healing,  con- 
ciliatory side  of  the  movement,  who  had  large  views, 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        123 

and  who  could  thoroughly  appreciate  all  that  was 
good  in  other  parties.  These  qualifications  Pusey 
possessed  in  a  far  greater  degree  than  his  friend, 
who,  in  spite  of  his  personal  humility,  was  very 
combative,  and  who,  when  he  had  once  made  up  his 
mind,  CQuld  never  go  one  inch-breadth  out  of  his 
rut.  Thomas  Mozley,  after  doing  full  justice  to  his 
many  admirable  qualities,  tells  us  *'  that  Keble  very 
soon  lost  his  temper  in  discussion",  and  that  "there 
really  was  no  getting  on  with  Keble  without  entire 
agreement,  that  is,  submission".^  This  was  when 
he  was  a  very  young  man,  flushed  with  University 
success  immediately  following  a  home  training,  and 
without  the  discipline  of  ''give  and  take"  which  is 
one  of  the  best  features  of  a  public  school.  Years 
softened  down  this  characteristic,  and  grace  kept  it 
in  check;  but  it  was  still  there,  and  the  career  of  a 
country  clergyman  was  not  the  sort  of  career  to 
remove  it. 

Pusey,  perhaps,  erred  in  the  other  extreme;  he 
was  too  apt  to  yield,  when  a  leader  ought  to  have 
been  firm ;  he  was  too  ready  to  take  everyone  at  his 
own  estimate  of  himself,  and  was  deficient  in  insight 
of  character.  These  defects  often  brought  him  into 
trouble,  especially  in  connection  with  men  who, 
though  they  still  remained  in  the  English  Church, 
were  not  loyal  English  Churchmen.  But,  on  the 
whole,  his  policy  of  conciliation  was  a  beneficial  one. 
**  I  should  myself",  writes  Mr.  Palmer,  *'have  often 

^Heminiicences,  chiefly  of  Oriel  College,  i.  aao  and  221. 


124  The  Anglican  Revival. 

been  in  favour  of  a  sterner  and  more  direct  policy 
towards  all  who  shared  in  semi- Romanizing  and 
Ritualistic  opinions,  and  whom  Pusey  conciliated ; 
but  my  own  opinions  were  proved  to  be  faulty  by 
the  result;  for  by  mild  methods  the  church  has  been 
saved  from  further  disruption,  and  retains  all  the 
energies  which  a  different  mode  of  proceeding  might 
have  lost."^  Lord  Selborne,  after  doing  full  justice 
to  Pusey's  ''admirable  personal  qualities,  his  piety, 
charity,  self-denial,  consistency,"  adds:  ''I  do  not 
think  that,  when  he  led,  he  was  a  strong  leader;  he 
abetted  and  justified  things  which  his  natural  mo- 
deration, good  sense,  if  he  had  possessed  Keble's 
firmness  when  his  friends  were  concerned,  might 
have  been  expected  to  disapprove,  and  for  which  his 
distaste,  on  occasions,  was  not  concealed.  He  was 
a  faithful  member  of  the  Church  of  England  to  the 
end,  without  any  sign  at  any  time  of  inclination 
towards  Rome,  though  he  desired  peace  between  all 
churches,  and  with  all  men."^  This  last  sentence  is 
most  literally  true;  but  Pusey's  guileless  trustful- 
ness sometimes  made  him  think  others  as  loyal  to 
the  church  as  himself,  when  they  were  nothing  of 
the  kind;  and  hence  he  was,  not  unnaturally,  re- 
garded at  times  as  too  favourable  towards  Rome. 
Another  apparent  drawback  to  Pusey's  leadership 
was  that  he  had  been  a  recluse  since  the  death  of 
Mrs.  Pusey,  in  1839;  he  was  never  seen  in  general 

*  Narrative  (Supplement),  p.  241. 

*  Memorials  of  Roundell,  Earl  of  Selborne,  i.  399. 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        125 

society,  and  was  grave  and  silent  even  among 
friends.  But  this  cut  two  ways.  A  religious  leader 
must  not  make  himself  too  common,  or  descend 
too  readily  from  his  pedestal.  **l  never",  writes 
Newman,  "had  the  staidness  or  dignity  necessary 
for  a  leader."^  Newman's  irresistible  charm  of  man- 
ner and  character  carried  this  off  in  his  own  case; 
but  as  a  general  principle,  he  is  right  in  thinking 
that  staidness  and  dignity  are  necessary  for  a  leader 
of  men.  There  was  a  great  contrast  between  the 
two  men  in  this  respect,  which  was  very  marked 
when  they  were  seen  together.  **  Pusey's  pres- 
ence", writes  Mr.  Williams,  "always  checked 
Newman's  lighter  and  unrestrained  mood;  and  I 
was  myself  silenced  by  so  awful  a  person."^ 

Be  all  this,  however,  as  it  may,  Pusey  was  the 
recognized  leader  of  the  movement  for  many  years. 
"  He  regulated  the  affairs  of  the  remains  of  the 
Tract  party,  which  were  very  powerful  and  numerous 
from  1845  to  1882."* 

But  there  had  always  been  a  Triumvirate.  Who 
was  to  make  the  third,  now  that  Newman  was 
gone? 

A  paper  was  privately  circulated  by  the  leaders 
among  their  followers,  suggesting  subjects  for 
mutual  intercession,  such  as,  the  unity  and  peace 
of  the  church,  the  conversion  of  sinners,  the  advance- 
ment and  perseverance  of  the  faithful.     This  paper 

^Apologia,  p.  59.  *  Autobiography  0/  Isaac  Williams,  p.  70. 

■  Palmer,  Supplement  to  Narrative,  p.  243. 


126  The  Anglican  Revival. 

was  subscribed  with  the  initials,  **  J.  K.,  E.  B.  P., 
and  C.  M."  ''  C.  M."  stands  for  Charles  Marriott, 
and  the  subscription  intimates  that  the  two  remain- 
ing leaders  had  tacitly  ** co-opted"  him  into  their 
body.  It  is  noticeable  that  **J.  K."  stands  before 
**  E.  B.  P.",  and  this  was  the  right  order,  not  only 
in  point  of  seniority,  but  also  as  indicative  of  their 
future  course.  The  party  was  to  be  led  by  Pusey, 
but  Pusey  himself  was  greatly  under  the  influence 
of  Keble,  whom  he  accepted,  not  only  as  his  spiri- 
tual father,  but  as  one  to  whom  he  might  have  re- 
course in  all  emergencies.  But  who  was  this  third 
member  of  the  Triumvirate? 

Charles  Marriott  (1811-1858)  would  have  seemed 
to  the  superficial  observer  the  last  person  in  the 
world  fitted  to  take  Newman's  place;  for,  to  all 
appearance,  he  was  the  exact  antipodes  of  the  lost 
leader.  Among  the  advantages  which  Newman 
possessed  were  an  extraordinarily  fascinating  per- 
sonality, a  most  persuasive  eloquence,  and  a  power 
of  writing  English  which  has  rarely  if  ever  been 
equalled.  In  all  these  points  Marriott  seemed  to 
be  conspicuously  deficient.  He  was  silent,  absent- 
minded,  nervous,  and  full  of  personal  eccentricities 
which  could  hardly  fail  to  provoke  a  smile.  He  was 
very  far  indeed  from  being  a  popular  preacher,  and 
he  wrote  in  a  plain,  homely  (though,  of  course, 
scholarly)  style,  which  was  not  at  all  likely  to  be 
impressive.  Newman  was  essentially  a  brilliant 
man  in  every  way,  Marriott  essentially  the  reverse. 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        127 

But  all  these  drawbacks  were  merely  on  the  sur- 
face; when  we  penetrate  a  little  deeper,  we  see  at 
once  why  Marriott  was  emphatically  the  right  man 
in  the  right  place,  as  third  member  of  the  trium- 
virate. It  is  to  the  great  credit  of  the  undergraduates 
that,  next  to  Newman,  no  man  had  had,  for  a  long 
time,  so  much  influence  over  the  more  thoughtful 
and  earnest  of  them  as  Charles  Marriott,  in  spite  of 
his  manifold  and  manifest  disadvantages.  But  it  is 
not  surprising.  There  is  nothing  that  appeals  more 
to  the  young  mind  than  genuineness,  and  Charles 
Marriott  was  thoroughly  genuine — genuine  in  his 
learning  and  scholarship,  genuine  in  his  saintliness, 
genuine  in  his  heart-felt  sympathy  with  the  shy  and 
the  dull,  as  well  as  with  the  forward  and  the  brilliant, 
genuine  in  his  unswerving  attachment  to  the  church 
of  his  baptism.  He  was  an  ardent  admirer  and 
devoted  disciple  of  Newman ;  and  Newman  on  his 
part  fully  appreciated  his  disciple's  merits.  As  early 
as  1840  he  wrote  to  Pusey :  **  If  one  could  do  as  one 
would,  I  would  have  Marriott  provost  [of  Oriel] ;  he 
has  a  particular  art  of  taking  young  men,  and  has 
had  it  from  an  undergraduate".^  And  again,  in 
1 84 1,  to  Dr.  Routh,  in  writing  to  whom  he  would 
naturally  measure  his  words:  "  Marriott  is  a  grave, 
sober,  and  deeply-religious  person;  a  great  reader 
of  ecclesiastical  antiquity;  and  has  more  influence 
with  younger  men  than  any  one  perhaps  of  his 
standing".*   This  is  strong  testimony  from  one  who 

>  See  Lift  cf  Putty,  it  138.      «  See  Burgon's  Lives  of  Twelve  Good  Men ,  i.  345. 


128  The  Anglican  Revival. 

had  himself  to  perfection  the  art  of  attracting  young 
men;  and  it  is  thoroughly  borne  out  by  Dean 
Church,  who  was  one  of  the  young  men  attracted: 
''The  only  out-college  man",  he  writes,  **of  any 
mark,  except  Moberly,  that  I  knew  much  of  while 
I  was  at  Wadham  [as  an  undergraduate],  was 
Charles  Marriott.  .  .  .  No  man,  I  suppose,  was 
more  smiled  at  in  Oxford,  both  for  his  words  and 
his  silence.  But  no  man  that  I  ever  heard  of,  had 
such  strange  influence,  the  influence  arising  from 
sheer  respect,  in  turbulent  Oxford  scenes  among  the 
undergraduates,  as  in  the  rows  at  the  Union.  No 
one  was  so  listened  to,  as  if  men  believed  in  his 
sincerity  and  truth  of  purpose,  and  entire  absence 
of  indirect  motives."^  It  was  an  advantage  to 
Marriott  that  he  belonged  to  the  right  college. 
Oriel  and  Trinity  had  produced  the  chief  originators, 
and  been  the  chief  centres  of  the  movement,  and  it 
was  meet  that  the  new  leader  should  be  a  Fellow  of 
Oriel.  On  Newman's  defection  Marriott  at  once 
loyally  transferred  his  allegiance  to  Pusey,  though 
no  one  could  be  to  him  quite  what  Newman  had 
been. 

Another  Oxford  resident,  who  now  begins  to  take 
a  very  prominent  part  in  the  movement,  was  Mr.  J. 
B.  Mozley,  one  of  a  very  clever  family.  James  Botv- 
ling  Mozley  (i8 13-1878)  was  one  of  those  who  had 
fallen  deeply  under  the  influence  of  Newman ;  but 
he  never  dreamed  of  following  him  to  Rome.     It 

*  See  Dean  Church's  Life  and  Letters,  pt.  i.  p.  13. 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        129 

will  be  remembered  that  he  was  one  of  those  graduate 
students  of  theology  who  were  supported  by  Pusey 
before  they  won  their  fellowships ;  and  he  helped  in 
editing  **The  Library  of  the  Fathers".  But  his  was 
one  of  those  minds  that  develop  late;  and  it  was  not 
until  this  later  stage  of  the  movement  that  he  really 
came  to  the  front,  when  for  many  years  he  did 
yeoman  service  to  it  by  his  pen.^  He  was  a  very 
independent  thinker,  who  had  not  the  slightest 
scruple  about  differing  from  his  party,  when  he 
thought  that  party  wrong.  A  memorable  instance 
of  this  will  appear  on  a  later  page.  The  times  par- 
ticularly needed  a  man  of  Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley's  pecu- 
liar abilities.  We  have  seen  how  The  British  Critic 
collapsed  in  the  autumn  of  1843.  It  was  succeeded 
in  1844  by  Tlie  Christian  Remembrancer^  which  had 
been  founded  in  1841,  and  had  been  well  conducted 
for  the  three  years  under  the  joint-editorship  of 
William  Scott  of  Hoxton  and  Francis  Garden.  In 
1844  it  became  a  Quarterly,  and  Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley  for 


^  His  character  and  position  are  summed  up  with  great  discrimination  by 
his  old  Oriel  friend,  Lord  Blachford  (Sir  Frederick  Rogers):  "He  was 
wholly  genuine — in  his  friendships,  his  arguments,  his  measurement  of 
things,  and  in  his  devotion  to  the  Church  of  England — not  an  imagination 
of  his  own  mind,  nor  exactly  the  church  as  it  is;  but  a  distinct  historical 
community,  having,  Uke  his  country,  its  defects  and  its  merits;  and  in  spite 
of  these  defects,  capable  of  greatness  and  goodness  on  the  basis  supplied  by 
its  formularies  and  great  divines.  .  .  .  With  a  lively  discrimination  of 
characters  and  situations,  he  had  not  the  flexibility  of  address,  the  resource, 
the  practical  energy,  or  the  taste  for  active  movement,  which  are  required 
for  a  leader.  His  line  was  thought,  and  in  choosing  theology  for  the  object 
of  that  thought,  he  approached  it  on  its  philosophical  side." — Review  of 
Mozley's  Essays  in  The  Nineteenth  Century,  1879. 

(M426)  I 


130  The  Anglican  Revival. 

a  short  time  took  the  place  of  Mr.  Garden;  but  dur- 
ing the  greater  part  of  its  career,  which  ended  in  1868, 
Mr.  Scott,  who  was  a  very  active  and  prominent 
member  of  the  High  Church  party  until  his  death 
in  1872,  was  its  sole  editor.  But  its  success  was 
greatly  due  to  the  good  writing  of  Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley. 
Its  first  number  contained  his  brilliant  article  on 
Dr.  Arnold, — though  an  old  Rugbeian  must  venture 
to  protest  against  the  one-sidedness  of  the  sketch 
which  he  drew.  Many  of  his  other  essays,  which 
have  now  become  classical,  first  appeared  in  the 
pages  of  The  Christian  Remenihrancer. 

Mr.  Mozley  also  helped  largely  in  starting  and 
writing  up  a  longer-lived  and  still  more  effective 
periodical.  The  Guardian^  which  was  planned  by  a 
few  friends  in  1844-5,  and  launched  into  the  world 
on  January  21,  1846.  It  sounds  strange  now  to 
hear  that  The  Guardian  at  first  seemed  likely  to 
prove  a  failure, — in  fact,  that  it  narrowly  escaped 
death  half  a  year  after  its  birth.  *'  The  fate  of  The 
Guardian  ",  writes  Mozley  to  his  very  clever  sister 
Anne,  in  July,  1846,  *Ms,  I  fear,  sealed.  The  cir- 
culation keeps  obstinately  stationary."^  The  remon- 
strances of  Christopher  Wordsworth  (afterwards 
Bishop  of  Lincoln)  and  others  saved  its  life  for  a 
time.  ''''The  Guardian^''  writes  Mozley  again,  *Mt 
has  been  resolved,  is  to  go  on  to  complete  its  year 
of  trial,  but  not  till  after  much  consultation  and 
doubt."  ^     Happily  the  crisis  was  tided  over,  and 

^Letters,  &c.,  p.  178.  ^Letters,  Sec,  p.  179. 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        131 

The  Guardian  remains  to  this  day  not  only  an 
organ  of  which  the  party  that  it  represents  may 
well  be  proud,  but  a  paper  of  wide  and  general 
interest. 

With  The  Christian  Remembrancer  for  a  Quarterly 
and  The  Guardian  for  a  Weekly,  the  High  Church 
party  was  far  more  strongly  represented  in  the  press 
than  it  had  ever  been  in  the  days  of  the  Tracts. 
And  it  should  be  particularly  noted  that,  so  far  as 
can  be  now  ascertained,  the  chief  writers  in  both — 
certainly  in  The  Guardian — were  Oxford  men,  and 
for  the  most  part  Oxford  residents.  This  hardly 
tallies  with  the  theory  that  after  the  catastrophe  of 
1845,  Oxford  talent  deserted  the  Oxford  movement. 
Mozley  stands  first  of  all ;  and  Dean  Church  does 
not  go  one  whit  beyond  the  truth  when  he  reckons 
him  as,  **  after  Mr.  Newman,  the  most  forcible  and 
impressive  of  the  Oxford  writers  ".^ 

But  there  were  other  Oxford  men,  resident  or 
non-resident,  who  seem  to  me  decidedly  superior 
as  brilliant-  writers  to  those  of  the  earlier  stage  of 
the  movement — always,  of  course,  excepting  New- 
man, who  shines  forth  ^^velut  inter  ignes  Luna 
minores  ". 

Take,  for  instance,  the  two  brothers  Haddan. 
Thomas  Henry  Haddan  (1814-1873)  may  be  re- 
garded, so  far  as  that  honour  can  be  attributed  to 

*  The  Oxford  Movement,  p,  293. 

*I  would  lay  stress  upon  the  epithet  "brilliant",  because  I  would  not 
contend  that  any  of  them  were  superior  in  point  of  sotind  learning  to  the 
earlier  writers  in  the  movement 


132  The  Anglican  Revival. 

any  one  man,  as  the  originator  of  The  Guardian, 
He  was  a  double  first  -  classman,  a  Fellow  of 
Exeter,  and  afterwards  Vinerian  Fellow.  Like 
others  to  be  noticed  in  the  same  connection,  he  was 
a  lawyer,  not  a  clergyman,  and,  so  far  as  theology 
was  concerned,  he  did  no  work  comparable  to  that 
of  his  younger  brother  Arthur  West  Haddan  (18 16- 
1873),  another  Oxford  man,  who  became  a  resident 
Fellow  of  Trinity,  where  he  was  deeply  influenced 
by  Isaac  Williams.  For  about  a  year  he  was  New- 
man's assistant-curate  at  S.  Mary's,  and  then 
succeeded  Williams  as  college  tutor  of  Trinity  in 
1842,  remaining  in  that  post  until  1857.  He  wrote 
both  for  The  Christian  Remembrancer  and  The 
Guardian  from  the  first;  and  his  contributions,  like 
those  of  Mr.  Mozley,  were  peculiarly  valuable  to 
the  cause,  because  the  forte  of  both  was  ecclesi- 
astical history ;  and  on  historical  grounds  the  Angli- 
can position  was  impregnable.  Both  could  write  not 
only  forcibly  but  fiercely ;  and  people  soon  learnt 
to  be  rather  shy  about  attacking  such  authorities. 

Another  founder  of  The  Guardian  was  a  layman 
and  a  lawyer,  Mountague  Bernard  (1820- 1882), 
an  Oxford  first-classman  and  a  Vinerian  Fellow, 
and  afterwards  Fellow  of  All  Souls,  who  soon 
undertook  its  higher  editorial  work,  though  Mr. 
Martin  Sharp  was  ostensible  editor  as  well  as  the 
publisher  and  admirable  manager  of  its  affairs;  and 
there  was  yet  another  lawyer,  Frederick  Rogers 
(1811-1889),  a  double  first-classman  and  Fellow  of 


Oxford  after  Newman's  Secession.        133 

Oriel,  who  was  not  only  one  of  the  founders  of  The 
Guardian,  but  has  kindly  left  us  a  most  interesting 
account  of  the  first  meetings  of  the  projectors  *Mn 
a  room  opposite  the  printing-press  in  Little  Pulteney 
Street",  where,  in  spite  of  the  discouragement  of 
the  public,  they  went  on  *' writing  articles  and  re- 
vising proofs ".  And  least  of  all  must  we  forget 
to  notice  among  the  earliest  writers  both  for  The 
Christian  Remembrancer  and  The  Guardian,  R, 
W,  Church  (1815-1890),  another  first  -  classman 
and  Fellow  of  Oriel,  the  very  flower  of  Oxford 
culture,  who  nearly  fifty  years  later  immortalized 
The  Oxford  Movement  in  a  work  which  posterity 
will  not  easily  let  die.  Both  Rogers  and  Church 
were  intimate  friends  of  Newman,  but  neither  of 
them  was  tempted  for  a  moment  to  follow  him  to 
Rome. 

With  men  such  as  these  for  its  enthusiastic  sup- 
porters, it  was  not  in  the  least  likely  that  the  move- 
ment should  die  away  in  the  place  of  its  birth, 
simply  because  one  Oxonian  of  real  genius,  and  a 
few  others  of  more  or  less  brilliancy,  deserted  it.  No  I 
Even  in  Oxford,  though  it  ceased  to  predominate, 
it  never  died.  A  great  change  undoubtedly  came 
over  the  University  after  Newman's  secession. 
Pusey  himself  had  less  to  do  with  the  movement 
at  Oxford,  and  more  to  do  with  it  in  the  country  at 
large.  Keble  withdrew  himself  more  and  more 
from  any  connection  with  his  old  University.  Isaac 
Williams,  whose  feelings  were  deeply  hurt,  as  well 


134  T^^  Anglican  Revival. 

they  might  be,  by  the  Poetry  Professorship  pro- 
ceedings, retired  into  the  country  for  good.  The 
able  men  who  have  been  noticed  above  affected  the 
movement  mainly  by  their  pens,  which  would  of 
course  touch  the  outside  world  quite  as  much  as 
Oxford  itself.  Our  interest,  therefore,  will  be  no 
more  centred  at  Oxford,  but  will  take  a  wider  range. 
It  will  also  be  of  a  different  character.  Mr.  Palmer 
characterizes  the  movement  up  to  1845  as  ''essen- 
tially an  aristocratic  movement,  addressing  itself  to 
the  higher  and  more  educated  classes  through  the 
medium  of  the  intellect  ".^  Perhaps  '*  academical  " 
would  have  been  a  happier  epithet  than  ''aristo- 
cratic", which  conveys  the  idea  of  "the  upper  ten"; 
whereas,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  none  of  the  leaders 
except  Pusey,  and  few,  if  any,  of  the  followers 
belonged  to  that  select  circle.  But  they  did  all 
belong  to  the  aristocracy  of  intellect.  The  very 
creme  de  la  creme  of  Oxford  culture  had  been  their 
ordinary  food,  and  it  affected  them  for  life.  They 
could  not  play  to  the  gallery;  they  recoiled  from 
anything  that  was  merely  showy  and  superficial; 
in  the  Keble  group  this  delicacy  was  intensified 
by  what  has  been  called  "the  Fairford  "  or  "the 
Bisley"  influence;  but  it  was  conspicuous  enough 
in  them  all.  They  had  all  the  advantages,  and 
also  the  disadvantages  of  being  thoroughly  imbued 
with  the  habit  of  mind,  or  to  use  their  own  expres- 
sion, the  ly^os,  which  Oxford  at  its  best  would  natur- 

1  Narrative,  p.  60. 


Cambridge  and  the  Movement.  135 

ally  tend  to  foster — delicacy  of  touch,  fastidiousness 
of  criticism,  and  a  want  of  acquaintance  with  the 
rough  Philistinism  of  the  outer  world.  And  when 
we  turn  from  the  movement  at  Oxford  to  the  same 
movement  in  that  outer  world,  we  feel  at  once  that 
we  are  breathing  a  different  air.  The  men  with 
whom  we  are  brought  into  contact,  even  the  ablest 
and  best  of  them,  are  of  a  different  intellectual 
calibre.  They  are  more  practical,  more  effective 
perhaps,  but  far  less  delicately  moulded,  far  less 
interesting  as  writers  and  thinkers.  But  before  we 
pass  on  to  this  new  phase,  we  must  remember  that 
there  was  another  great  university  besides  Oxford ; 
and  a  short  chapter,  at  s.ny  rate,  may  be  devoted  to 
Cambridge. 


Chapter   VI. 
Cambridge   and   the   Movement. 

Cambridge  was  not,  like  Oxford,  almost  a  virgin 
soil  for  the  reception  of  definite  church  principles 
when  the  movement  began.  The  ground  had 
already  been  occupied  by  teachers  who  had  pro- 
duced a  very  deep  religious  impression  among  a 
certain  class  of  piously-disposed  young  men.  There 
wore  few  if  any  men  at  Oxford  of  the  type  of 
Charles  Simeon,  William  Parish,  Isaac  Milner, 
James  Scholefield,  Joseph  and  William  Jowett. 
These,  indeed,  all  belonged  to  an  earlier  generation, 


136  The  Anglican  Revival. 

but  they  had  infused  a  strong  Evangelical  element 
into  the  University,  which  did  not  die  out  when  they 
died.  What  was  more  or  less  true  of  the  state  of 
religion  throughout  the  country  was  especially  true 
of  Cambridge ;  when  a  man  was  said  to  be  *'  serious  " 
it  meant  that  he  was  an  Evangelical.  Even  as  late 
as  1846,  when  F.  J.  A.  Hort  went  up  as  an  under- 
graduate to  Trinity,  **  It  was  natural",  hisbiographer 
tells  us,  **that  he  should  seek  out  first  the  teachers 
of  the  Evangelical  school,  who  then  represented  what 
was  best  in  the  religious  life  of  the  University. 
Chief  of  these  was  Dr.  Carus,  for  whom  he  always 
retained  a  great  regard."  ^ 

And  yet,  if  anywhere,  one  might  have  expected 
him  to  find  at  Trinity  religion  of  a  different  type, 
for  the  High  Church  party  had  had  some  strong 
representatives  there.  Christopher  Wordsworth  the 
elder  was  Master  from  1820,  and  held  the  office  for 
more  than  twenty  years.  He  was  brother  of  William 
Wordsworth,  with  whom  he  was  always  on  terms 
of  the  closest  intimacy,  and  whose  religious  views 
he  largely  influenced.  He  had  been  an  intimate 
friend  of  Joshua  Watson,  H.  H.  Norris,  and  the  rest 
of  the  Clapton  sect,  and  was  an  earnest  and  uncom- 
promising High  Churchman.  R.  W.  Evans,  author 
of  The  Rectory  of  Valehead  and  The  Bishopric  of 
SoulSy  had  been  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  the  college  for 
several  years  from  18 14;  and  though  he  had  now 
taken  a  living,  he  must,  one  would  have  thought, 

^Life  and  Letters  of  Penton  J.  A.  Hort,  i.  41. 


Cambridge  and  the  Movement.  137 

have  left  a  High  Church  impress  behind  him.  W.  H. 
Mill,  the  famous  Orientalist  and  quondam  Fellow  of 
Trinity,  had  returned  to  Cambridge  as  Christian 
Advocate,  and  in  1848  became  Regius  Professor  of 
Hebrew;  and  he  was  always  counted  as  a  member 
of  the  same  party.  Christopher  Wordsworth  the 
younger  had  been  classical  lecturer  at  Trinity  not  so 
many  years  before,  and  was  even  then  delivering  his 
famous  Hulsean  lectures  at  Cambridge.  Charles 
Webb  Le  Bas,  who  was  a  voluminous  contributor 
to  the  British  Critic  both  before  and  after  Newman 
was  editor,  and  also  to  the  British  Magazine^  and 
was,  moreover,  famous  as  a  university  preacher, 
had  been  a  Fellow  of  Trinity.  And  yet  an  earnest 
undergraduate  had  to  turn  to  the  Evangelicals  as 
guides  in  his  religious  life.  The  fact  is  an  illustra- 
tion of  what  has  been  frequently  intimated  in  these 
pages,  viz.  that  though  there  was  a  compact  and 
able  party  of  excellent  High  Churchmen,  quite 
apart  from  those  who  belonged  to  the  Oxford  move- 
ment of  1833,  yet  they  had  not  at  all  succeeded  in 
making  their  influence  generally  felt;  and  this,  so 
£ar  as  Cambridge  is  concerned,  is  illustrated  in 
a  somewhat  different  way  by  the  fact  that  when 
Hugh  James  Rose  was  beating  about  for  writers  for 
the  British  Magazine  in  1831,  he  was  obliged  to 
have  recourse  to  Oxford,  because  his  own  university 
furnished  few  who  were  available  for  the  purpose. 

Nevertheless,  it  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  sup- 
pose that  Cambridge  contributed  little  or  nothing 


13^  The  Anglican  Revival. 

towards  the  general  church  movement.  On  the 
contrary,  it  did,  in  one  sense,  more  than  Oxford; 
or,  at  any  rate,  it  came  to  the  rescue  when  Oxford 
seemed  (though  only  seemed)  to  have  collapsed. 
The  lectures  of  the  Lady  Margaret  professor,  J.  J. 
Blunt,  between  1840  and  1845,  on  the  early  Fathers, 
led  men,  as  another  Cambridge  professor,  Bishop 
Kaye,  had  done  before,  to  the  historical  view,  which 
has  always  been  the  strong  side  of  the  Anglican 
party;  and  his  subsequent  lectures  on  the  ''Acquire- 
ments and  Principal  Obligations  and  Duties  of  the 
Parish  Priest "  were  an  excellent  guide  to  the  work- 
ing of  a  parish  on  High  Church  lines. 

Christopher  Wordsworth  the  younger,  again, 
though  he  certainly  cannot  be  called  a  Tractarian, 
was  as  certainly  a  very  important  factor  in  the 
Anglican  movement.  And  the  splendid  reputation 
which  he  had  won  in  his  Cambridge  career  no 
doubt  tended  to  commend  his  church  principles  in 
his  own  university;  but  he  had  really  not  very 
much  to  do  with  Cambridge  in  after-life.  It  was 
at  Westminster,  and  afterwards  in  the  diocese  of 
Lincoln,  that  his  main  influence  was  exercised. 
As  to  his  own  personal  views,  Pusey,  Keble,  and 
Newman  do  not  appear  to  have  affected  him  at 
all,  in  the  way  either  of  attraction  or  of  repulsion. 
He  simply  thought  and  read  out  the  subject  for 
himself;  and  the  result  he  arrived  at  is  expressed 
in  a  condensed  form  in  his  Tkeophilus  AnglicanuSy 
which  has  been,  perhaps,  the  most  widely  influential 


Cambridge  and  the  Movement.  139 

of  all  his  many  compositions.  It  appeared  in  1843, 
just  when  the  alarm  excited  by  the  obviously  Roman 
tendency  of  a  section  of  the  Oxford  party  was  reach- 
ing its  height,  and  it  met  a  deeply-felt  want.  No 
one  could  suspect  Dr.  Wordsworth  of  any  leaning 
towards  Rome;  and  he  was  so  notably  honest, 
guileless,  and  outspoken  that  no  one  could  dream 
of  thinking  that  he  had  any  other  object  than  that 
which  appeared  on  the  surface.  His  little  manual 
gave  the  young  churchman  (it  was  originally  in- 
tended simply  for  the  writer's  pupils  at  Harrow)  a 
clear  and  definite  conception,  first  of  the  Catholic 
Church ;  then  of  the  Anglican  branch  of  that  Church, 
and  her  true  position  in  relation  to  Rome  on  the 
one  side  and  the  various  Protestant  sects  on  the 
other;  and  then  of  her  connection  with  the  state 
as  the  national  church  of  England.  It  is  perfectly 
packed  with  information,  fortified  by  well-chosen 
quotations  from  recognized  divines,  all  tending  to 
the  support  of  English  Church  principles.  But  no 
one  can  read  it  without  perceiving  that  it  is  abso- 
lutely independent  of  the  Oxford  movement;  and  no 
one  can  study  the  life  and  character  of  the  writer 
without  perceiving  that  they  are  of  a  totally  different 
type  from  that  of  any  of  the  Oxford  leaders  who 
have  been  described  in  these  pages. 

But  there  were  some  Cambridge  men  who  ap- 
proached much  more  nearly  to  the  Oxford  type  than 
any  who  have  been  yet  mentioned.  Among  these 
were  the  founders  of  the  Cambridge  Camden  Society, 


140  The  Anglican  Revival. 

which  was  one  of  the  first  attempts,  though  not  quite 
the  first,  to  bring  the  ritual  and  doctrinal  aspects  of 
the  church  movement  into  harmony.  This  subject, 
however,  will  be  treated  of  in  a  future  chapter. 
Suffice  it  here  to  say  that  in  1839  a  few  very  young 
men  banded  together  chiefly  with  the  view  of  im- 
proving church  fabrics  and  church  services,  which 
(with,  of  course,  notable  exceptions)  had  fallen  to  a 
lamentably  low  ebb.  One  of  the  most  vigorous  and 
accomplished  of  these  wasyb^w  Mason  Neale  (1818 — 
1866),  who  was,  perhaps,  the  most  pronounced 
<*  Puseyite  "  of  all  the  Cantabs.  Like  Keble,  New- 
man, and  Marriott,  he  never  attained  to  any  dignity 
whatever  in  the  English  Church;  but,  like  them, 
he  deservedly  won  a  reputation  and  exercised  an 
influence  far  greater  than  most  of  the  dignitaries  of 
his  time  ever  achieved.  Poet,  scholar,  divine,  his- 
torian, translator,  tract-writer,  tale-writer,  ecclesio- 
logist,  journalist,  Neale  poured  forth  his  varied  works 
in  rapid  succession,  and  caught  the  ear  of  many 
different  sections  of  society;  while  as  warden  of 
Sackville  College,  East  Grinstead — a  high-sounding 
title,  which,  however,  only  means  that  he  was  head 
of  what  Dr.  Littledale  frankly  calls  "an  obscure 
alms-house 'V  with  a  stipend  of  between  £,2.0  and 
;^30  a  year — he  rallied  around  him  what  may  be 
regarded  as  a  very  advanced  guard  of  the  move- 
ment. He  had  also  the  honour  of  being  a  confessor 
for  the  cause.     From  the  very  outset  of  his  clerical 

^See  Dr.  Littledale's  Memoir  of  Dr.  J,  M.  Neale. 


Cambridge  and  the  Movement.  141 

career  he  was  a  marked  man,  as  a  *^  Camdenian  "; 
and  the  Bishop  of  Winchester  (Dr.  Sumner)  refused 
to  license  him  in  his  diocese.  He  was  afterwards, 
on  more  than  one  occasion,  subjected  to  mob 
violence,  and  was  brought  into  collision  with  his 
diocesan.  Dr.  Gilbert,  of  Chichester,  who  for  a  time 
inhibited  him  from  officiating  in  his  diocese,  though 
it  is  a  comfort  to  know  that  the  two  were  thoroughly 
reconciled  before  Neale's  premature  death.  Neale, 
like  his  friend  John  Keble,  combined  the  utmost 
gentleness  of  manner  with  an  iron  inflexibility  of 
will;  and  he  always  carried  his  point.  When  the 
episcopal  inhibition  was  removed  in  1863,  **So,  I 
hope,"  he  writes,  **ends  a  battle  of  more  than 
sixteen  years,  I  having  neither  withdrawn  a  single 
word  nor  altered  a  single  practice  (except  in  a  few 
instances  by  way  of  going  further)".  Like  the 
Oxford  Tractarian  leaders,  Neale  was  a  man  of  the 
highest  culture;  as  a  classical  scholar  he  had  few 
equals;  and  his  well-known  hymns,  translated  and 
original,  are  no  less  conspicuous  for  their  extreme 
refinement  than  for  their  poetical  merit.  But  he 
was  essentially  a  practical  man,  and  the  church  has 
as  much  reason  to  be  grateful  to  him  for  his  prac- 
tical work  as  for  his  writings.  ^ 

*  His  friend  Dr.  Littledale  wrote  a  most  vivid  and  interesting  sketch  of  his 
life;  but  this  seems  difficult  of  access— at  least,  it  was  not  without  some 
difficulty  that  the  present  writer  found  access  to  it— but  a  full  and  accurate 
account  of  his  life  and  writings  will  be  found  in  Sf.  Margaret's  [East  Grin- 
stead]  Magatine,  from  July,  1887,  onwards.  The  most  popular  of  his  verse 
compositions  arc  his  translations  of  the  Hora  Navissima,  or  Rhythm  of 


142  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Another  Cambridge  man,  who  was  also  a  founder 
of  the  Camden  Society,  its  first  secretary,  and  editor 
of  its  organ,  The  Ecclesiologist^  and  who,  like  Neale, 
resembled  the  Oxford  Tractarians  more  than  the 
Cambridge  High  Churchmen,  was  Benjamm  Webb 
(1820- 1 885).  Mr.  Webb  made  his  mark  both  as  a 
London  clergyman  at  S.  Andrew's,  Wells  Street, 
one  of  the  earliest  and  most  prominent  of  the 
advanced  churches,  and  as  editor  of  the  Church 
Quarterly  Review.  William  Butler,  again,  who,  as 
an  efficient  and  successful  priest  at  Wantage,  almost 
rivalled  Dr.  Hook  at  Leeds,  was  trained  at  Cam- 
bridge, but  was  more  of  the  Oxford  Tractarian  than 
of  the  old  High  Church  type;  and  so,  in  a  different 
way,  was  that  most  stanch  and  munificent  lay 
churchman,  A.  J.  Beresford  Hope,  though  he  was 
identified  with  Cambridge  almost  all  his  life. 

All  these,  however,  and  others  who  could  be  men- 
tioned, bore  traces  of  their  Cambridge  training,  and 
were  not  quite  of  the  Oxford  pattern.  Perhaps  one 
difference  was  that  there  was  not  the  spell  of  the 
great  leaders  upon  them,  for  there  was  no  trium- 
virate at  Cambridge  like  that  which  directed  the 
Oxford  party.  Neither  was  there  any  section  which 
had  any  directly  Roman  tendencies.  Of  course  it 
is  not  meant  by  this  that  no  Cambridge  men  went 

Bernard  de  Morlaix,  Monk  of  Cluny,  from  which  the  well-known  hymns, 
"Brief  life  is  here  our  portion",  "Jerusalem  the  golden",  and  "For  thee, 
O  dear,  dear  country"  are  taken ;  and  "  Art  thou  weary,  art  thou  languid?" 
"O  happy  band  of  pilgrims",  and  "Fierce  was  the  wild  billow",  taken 
from  the  Greek. 


Cambridge  and  the  Movement.  143 

over  to  Rome,  but  only  that  when  they  did  go  over 
they  went  as  individuals,  not  as  members  of  a  party. 
Even  Dr.  Neale,  who  held  quite  as  advanced  views 
as  any  Oxford  man  who  kept  within  the  pale  of  the 
English  Church,  never  seems  to  have  felt  the  faintest 
inclination  to  cross  the  border.  The  infusion  of  the 
Cambridge  element  was  a  distinct  advantage  to  the 
movement.  The  different  course  of  education,  the 
different  surroundings,  the  very  absence  of  pro- 
minent leaders,  made  the  Cambridge  men  look  at 
the  whole  question  from  a  rather  different  point  of 
view,  and  produced  a  **  variety"  which  was  not 
only  **  pleasing",  but  decidedly  beneficial  to  the 
cause  which  all  alike  had  at  heart. 

But  the  greatest  benefit  which  the  movement 
derived  from  Cambridge  was  indirect  rather  than 
direct,  and  arose  from  quarters  which  were  pro- 
fessedly antagonistic  to  it.  The  religious  element, 
if  not  the  church  element,  was,  after  the  trying  year 
1845,  very  much  stronger  at  Cambridge  than  it  was 
at  Oxford.  The  leading  men  there  were  far  more 
settled  and  definite  in  their  Christian  convictions 
than  they  were  at  the  sister  university.  There  was 
a  triumvirate  at  Cambridge  which  was  as  influential 
in  its  way  as  the  Oxford  one  was.  **The  Three", 
as  Drs.  Westcott,  Lightfoot,  and  Hort  were  em- 
phatically called,  did  untold  good  in  keeping 
young  inquirers  firm  in  their  Christian,  and,  in  a 
sense,  church,  though  not  High  Church, convictions. 
What  Dr.  Hort  said  in  1879  applies  to  earlier  years: 


144  The  Anglican  Revival. 

*'  The  studies  of  the  place  [Cambridge]  discourage, 
instead  of  fostering,  youthful  *  sophistic ' ;  the  num- 
ber of  leading  men  who  are  known  to  be  conscien- 
tious Christians  makes  contempt  of  Christian  faith 
a  trifle  ridiculous ;  and  the  way  in  which  churchmen 
of  all  opinions,  both  graduates  and  undergraduates, 
are  accustomed  to  meet  and  work  together,  not  only 
keeps  party-spirit  in  check,  but  gives  power  to  the 
life  of  the  whole  body.  In  this  and  other  respects 
we  have  no  sharply-defined  camps,  and  consequently 
no  need  of  prematurely  closing  the  mind  against 
growth  in  knowledge  and  experience."^ 

All  this  is  undoubtedly  true;  but  it  told  in  another 
way.  Men  left  Cambridge  with  their  faith  unshaken, 
nay,  more  firmly  established  than  when  they  en- 
tered. But  then,  when  they  went  into  the  outer 
world,  and  especially  if  they  went  as  clergymen, 
they  were  apt  to  join  one  or  other  of  the  *' sharply- 
defined  camps  ",  and  by  far  the  most  attractive  has 
been  that  of  the  movement. 

In  another  way  Cambridge,  indirectly  but  very 
really,  has  contributed  more  than  its  quota  to  the 
success  of  the  Anglican  movement.  After  the  stormy 
events  of  the  forties  there  was  a  tendency  at  Oxford 
to  let  theology  alone,  and  to  devote  attention  to  more 
peaceful  studies.  But  Cambridge  had  not  been  in 
the  thick  of  the  combat,  and  it  suffered  from  no  such 
reaction.  The  consequence  was  that  for  the  twenty 
years  after  the  secession  of  Newman  sacred  literature 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Pent  on  J.  A.  Hort,  ii.  277. 


Cambridge  and  the  Movement.  145 

in  all  its  departments  was  enriched  far  more  by 
Cambridge  than  by  Oxford.  Now  it  is  of  immense 
importance  to  the  Church  of  England  (and  therefore 
to  the  movement  which  is  being  sketched),  that  she 
should  keep  up  her  traditions  as  a  learned  church ; 
and  after  those  years  of  storm  and  stress,  it  must  be 
confessed  that  the  credit  of  doing  so  rested  mainly 
with  Cambridge.  It  would  be  invidious  to  select 
names,  but  let  any  elderly  man  call  to  mind  what 
were  the  new  books  on  divinity  which  were  most 
popular,  and  most  helpful  to  him  in  his  youth,  and 
he  will  probably  find  that  the  great  majority  of  them 
were  written  by  Cambridge  men. 

An  university  training  had  more  to  do  with  the 
life  and  mind  of  the  church  fifty  years  ago  than  it 
has  now.  For  though  the  laity  are  an  essential  part 
of  the  church,  it  is  obvious  that  her  character  at  any 
particular  time  must  depend  largely  upon  the  char- 
acter of  her  clergy.  And  the  clergy  were  more 
closely  connected  with  the  universities  then  than 
they  are  now ;  for  not  only  was  there  a  larger  pro- 
portion of  university  men  among  their  ranks,  but 
the  college  system  impressed  itself  more  deeply  upon 
the  future  clergy  than  it  does  now,  when  very  many 
live  outside  the  college  walls,  and  when  college 
offices  are  to  a  great  extent  filled  by  laymen.  Hence 
it  has  been  thought  desirable  to  dwell  very  fully 
upon  the  parts  which  the  universities  played  in  the 
movement.  But  we  may  now  leave  the  cloister  and 
see  how  that  movement  affected  the  world  outside. 

(M426\  K 


146  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Chapter  VII. 

The  Movement  in  the  Outer  ^Vo^ld. — Dean  Hook 
and  Bishop  Wilberforce. 

**  Universities",  said  Newman,  ** are  the  natural 
centresof  intellectual  movements";  but  if  those  move- 
ments have  any  vital  force  in  them,  they  extend 
their  influence  far  and  wide,  whether  the  centre 
remains  the  same  or  not.  This  certainly  was  the 
case  with  the  movement  before  us.  Oxford  had  set 
the  ball  a-roUing;  Cambridge  contributed  its  share 
to  the  impetus ;  but  it  is  now  to  the  country  at  large 
that  we  must  look  in  order  to  estimate  its  effects. 

It  will  still  be  convenient  to  connect  what  went  on 
with  individual  names;  and  two  men  stand  pro- 
minently forward  as  having,  more  than  any  others, 
stamped  the  impress  of  the  revival  upon  the  parish 
and  upon  the  diocese  respectively. 

Although  it  was  the  tract-writers  who  gave  the 
first  impulse  to  the  church  movement  of  1833,  it 
by  no  means  follows  that  the  chief  agents  in  carry- 
ing its  principles  into  effect  should  have  identified 
themselves  with  the  so-called  Tractarians;  and,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  the  two  men  in  question  never  did 
so;  indeed,  they  were  not  seldom  brought  into 
somewhat  violent  collision  with  "Tractarianism  ". 
This,  of  course,  could  not  have  been  the  case,  had 
the  Anglican  movement  been  introducing  some  new 
system  of  doctrine;  but  that  was  just  what  its  origi- 


Dean  Hook.  147 

nators  vehemently  denied  that  they  were  doing. 
They  desired  simply  '*to  stand  upon  the  old  ways";^ 
they  appealed  to  primitive  antiquity,  and  were  quite 
content  to  abide  by  that  test.  It  was  not  on  prin- 
ciples, but  at  most  on  the  application  of  principles, 
and,  as  a  rule,  only  on  non-essential  details,  that  the 
different  agents  differed.  Hence,  when  men  declared 
that  they  never  were  Tractarians,  that  they  disap- 
proved of  the  action  of  the  Tractarians,  this  did  not 
necessarily  mean  they  were  thereby  disqualified  from 
taking  a  leading  part  in  the  movement  which  the 
tract-writers  started.  It  certainly  did  not  mean  so 
in  the  case  of  the  two  men  who  are  the  fittest  repre- 
sentatives of  church  work  on  Anglican  lines  in  the 
parish  and  the  diocese  respectively — Dean  Hook 
and  Bishop  Wilberforce.  For  several  reasons  it 
will  be  well  to  begin  first  with  the  smaller  area  and 
the  lesser  dignitary. 

Walter  Farquhar  Hook  (1798 -1875),  the  son  of  a 
country  clergyman  who  afterwards  became  Dean  of 
Worcester,  went  up  in  181 7  from  Winchester  to 
Oxford,  where  he  was  nominated  by  the  Prince 
Regent,  through  the  influence  of  his  grandfather. 
Sir  Walter  Farquhar,  to  a  studentship  at  Christ 
Church.  Pusey,  as  we  have  seen,  matriculated  as 
a  commoner  at  Christ  Church  in  1819.  The  two 
were  therefore  undergraduates  together,  but  Hook 
was  the  senior  by  nearly  two  years,  and  was  a  stu- 
dent while   Pusey  was  only  a  commoner.     Those 

*  "Stare  super  antiquas  vias." 


148  The  Anglican  Revival. 

who  know  the  inner  life  of  young  Oxford,  at  least 
in  the  first  half  of  the  present  century,  will  see  in 
these  differences  quite  enough  to  account  for  a  cer- 
tain air  of  seniority  and  superiority  in  Hook's  early 
letters  to  Pusey,  very  different  from  the  general 
tone  of  the  letters  addressed  to  that  somewhat  awe- 
inspiring  personage.  In  those  early  days  Pusey's 
views  were  not  settled,  and  there  was  of  course 
not  that  halo  of  sanctity  about  him  with  which  he 
was  afterwards  invested.  When  Hook  took  his 
B.A.  degree  in  182 1,  and  Pusey  in  1822,  the  two 
friends  entered  upon  very  different  lines  of  life, 
Pusey  remaining  at  Oxford,  and  Hook  commencing 
parish  work  at  once.  For  seven  years  Hook  was 
engaged  in  country  cures,  where,  although  he  was 
a  most  diligent  and  successful  parish  priest,  he 
naturally  found  abundance  of  leisure  for  regular  and 
systematic  theological  study.  He  took  full  advan- 
tage of  the  opportunity,  and  formed  his  views,  from 
which  he  never  diverged,  very  early.  This  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  in  1822,  when  he  was  still  only  a 
deacon,  and  when  Pusey  was  hardly  yet  freed  from 
the  throes  of  the  schools,  he  preached  a  sermon  at 
the  Bishop  of  Winchester's  visitation  at  Newport 
on  **The  peculiar  character  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land independently  of  its  connection  with  the  State", 
in  which  he  advocated  the  very  same  views  which 
were  insisted  upon  so  strongly  by  the  tract-writers 
eleven  years  later.  In  fact,  he  was  firmly  established 
in  his  theological  position,  which  was,  in  the  main, 


Dean  Hook.  149 

the  same  as  that  of  the  early  Tractarians,  long  before, 
and  quite  independently  of,  the  Oxford  movement; 
and  when  all  the  prime  movers  except  Keble  were 
either  yet  in  a  state  of  flux  or  belonged  to  quite  a 
different  school  of  thought.  Moreover,  he  formed 
his  conarictions  entirely  through  his  own  reading 
and  thought;  he  certainly  owed  nothing  in  this 
respect  either  to  his  home  or  his  school  or  his 
university  training.  The  only  human  being  to 
whom  he  appears  to  have  been  really  indebted  was 
Bishop  Jebb,  to  whom  he  frequently  refers  at  various 
times  in  such  terms  as  these:  ''You  know  my  system 
as  I  learnt  it  from  Bishop  Jebb"  (1837);  *'My  dear 
Gamaliel,  Bishop  Jebb"  (1840);  ''My  dear  spiritual 
father,  Bishop  Jebb"  (1849).^ 

In  1828  an  opportunity  was  given  him  of  showing 
how  his  principles  worked  on  a  larger  scale  than 
that  of  a  country  village,  and  nobly  did  he  avail 
himself  of  it.  He  was  appointed  to  the  living  of 
Holy  Trinity,  Coventry,  and  soon  made  his  mark 
in  that  large  parish.  It  is  difficult  to  realize  the 
extent  of  his  work  there,  because  it  embraced  the 
introduction  of  improvements  which  are  now  quite 
ordinary  parts  of  parochial  machinery,  but  which 
were  then  new,  and  could  not  be  carried  out  without 
a  struggle.  Evening  services,  frequent  celebrations 
of  the  holy  communion,  sermons  on  saints'  days, 
lectures  in  Lent,  classes  for  instruction,  and  so  forth, 

*Sec  Dean  Hook,  His  Life  and  Letters,  by  Stephens,  7th  ed.,  in  i  vol., 
pp.  240,  306,  433. 


150  The  Anglican  Revival. 

seem  matters  of  course  now,  but  they  were  innova- 
tions then,  and  had  to  be  fought  for  by  the  new 
vicar.  It  was  during  his  Coventry  period  that  the 
Oxford  movement  began;  and  Newman  writes  to 
him  in  1834  in  language  which  is  not  more  generous 
than  true:  '^  Your  being  obliged  to  retire  from  paro- 
chial duty  would  be  a  calamity  we  ought  to  try  to 
prevent,  as  we  have  no  specimen  (so  far  as  I  know) 
but  that  which  you  supply  of  the  influential  nature 
of  true  church  principles  on  a  town  population  ".^ 
He  carried  his  points  by  a  happy  blending  of 
geniality  and  dogged  perseverance;  being  absolutely 
sure  of  his  position  he  would  not  diverge  a  hair's- 
breadth  from  it.  The  result  was,  in  his  own  lan- 
guage, *'As  I  will  not  go  over  to  others,  others 
come  over  to  me". 

In  1837  still  larger  scope  for  his  energies  was 
given  him,  for  in  that  year  he  was  elected  by  the 
trustees  to  the  vicarage  of  Leeds,  one  of  the  other 
candidates  being  none  other  than  Samuel  Wilber- 
force.  The  election  was  vehemently  opposed  both 
by  the  Low  Church  party  at  Leeds,  and  by  The 
Record  and  the  Christian  Observer,  for  Hook  was 
known,  not  only  as  a  stanch  High  Churchman, 
but  as  a  personal  friend  of  the  obnoxious  tract- 
writers.  He  made  no  secret  of  this  friendship — 
indeed,  it  was  not  in  his  nature  to  make  a  secret  of 
anything.  **  'He  is  known  to.be  a  friend  of  Pusey, 
Keble,  and  Newman',**  he  writes,  quoting  indig- 

*  Quoted  in  Life  of  Hook,  p.  113. 


Dean  Hook.  151 

nantly  an  objection  that  had  been  raised  against 
him;  "and  what  higher  honour  can  a  man  have  on 
this  earth?" ^  But  Yorkshire  men  of  business,  and 
above  all  Yorkshire  working-men,  were  not  the  sort 
of  class  to  be  prejudiced  against  a  man  by  objec- 
tions of  this  kind.  He  was  perfectly  straightforward 
with  them,  full  of  bonhomie ,  ready  to  take  as  well 
as  to  deal  a  shrewd  blow  without  losing  his  temper. 
He  showed  his  hand  at  once:  *'You  see  before 
you",  he  said  in  his  first  sermon  at  Leeds,  **a  firm, 
determined,  consistent,  uncompromising,  devoted, 
but  I  hope  not  uncharitable  son,  servant,  and 
minister  of  the  honoured  Church  of  England";^  and 
this  he  proved  himself  all  through  his  remarkable 
career  at  Leeds.  Within  a  few  months  of  his  arrival 
enthusiastic  admiration  took  the  place  of  violent 
opposition,  and  Leeds  soon  became  a  stronghold 
of  the  church.  But  the  work  at  Leeds  under  Dr. 
Hook  was  a  natural  growth,  not  an  artificial  pro- 
duct; it  did  not  depend  upon  the  vicar's  com- 
manding personality,  and  then  collapse  when  that 
personality  was  removed.  There  is  a  sense  in 
which  his  characteristic  description  of  the  relation 
between  Leeds  and  himself — **  I  did  not  manage 
the  parish,  the  parish  managed  me  " — is  perfectly 
true.  His  aim  was  to  impress  not  himself  but  his 
principles  upon  his  people;  his  persuasiveness  was 
of  the  Demosthenic,  not  of  the  Ciceronian  type; 
he  did  not  make  men  say,  **  What  a  fine  orator  he 
is  I",  but  *♦  Let  us  go  and  fight  Philip". 

*  Life,  pi  217.  '  Id.,  p.  209. 


152  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Though  he  was  very  far  from  identifying  himself 
with  the  tract-writers,  the  latter  thoroughly  appre- 
ciated the  help  which  he  rendered  to  the  general 
cause  of  the  church,  and  also  the  difficulties  in  his 
position  in  comparison  with  their  own.  **You", 
writes  Newman  to  him  in  1838,  **are  in  the  thickest 
fire  of  the  enemy;  and  I  often  think  how  easy  it  is 
for  us  to  sit  quietly  here,  sheltered  from  bullets, 
while  you  often  get  what  is  meant  to  hit  us."^  And 
Pusey,  in  the  same  year:  ^'Thanks  for  your  defence 
of  us ;  as  for  your  being  our  disciple  the  thing  is 
absurd.  Newman  said,  in  the  Christian  Observer^ 
that  you  had  formed  or  received  your  views  long 
before  many  of  the  writers  in  the  Tracts  (long  before 
myself  on  many  points).  We  were  led  by  different 
paths  to  the  same  end,  and  from  our  early  separation 
had  little  to  do  in  forming  each  other's  opinions; 
and  you  have  held  them  earlier  than  Newman  pro- 
bably, and  far  longer  and  more  consistently  than 
ourselves."^ 

Pusey  soon  found  an  opportunity  of  giving  Hook 
a  practical  proof  of  his  appreciation  of  his  work. 
After  his  great  sorrow  in  1839  he  conceived  the  idea 
of  making  some  great  offering  to  God  in  memory 
of  his  dead  wife,  and  as  a  secret  act  of  penitence; 
and  he  determined  to  help  his  friend  Hook  by 
building  a  new  church  in  the  overgrown  parish  of 
Leeds.  He  intended  to  call  it  the  church  of  S. 
Cross,    but,    as   Bishop   Longley   objected    to  the 

1  Life  of  Hook,  p.  275.  '^  Life  of  Pusey,  ii.  40. 


Dean  Hook.  153 

designation,  **S.  Saviour's"  was  the  name  ulti- 
mately chosen.  The  foundation-stone  was  laid  on 
Sept.  14,  1842,  but  owing  to  various  objections 
raised  by  the  diocesan,  Bp.  Longley,  to  the  details 
of  construction,  the  church  was  not  ready  for  conse- 
cration until  October,  1845.  This  event  at  last  took 
place  just  after  Newman's  secession;  and  we  cannot 
wonder  that  both  Hook  and  his  diocesan  were 
rather  nervous  about  it.  *^  You  must  remember", 
writes  Hook  to  Pusey  on  Oct.  17,  '*  there  are  not 
five  persons  in  Leeds  who  will  sympathize  with 
you." 

However,  the  consecration  went  off  satisfactorily; 
but,  alas!  sore  troubles  were  at  hand.  The  first 
incumbent  was  a  Mr.  Ward,  apparently  not  a  very 
strong  man,  and  not  very  firmly  fixed  in  his  church 
principles.  When  matters  did  not  go  on  satisfac- 
torily, Dr.  Pusey  sent  to  the  rescue  as  curate  Mr. 
Macmullen,  who  at  any  rate  was  strong  enough, 
as  his  combat  with  Dr.  Hampden  in  1842  showed. 
Mr.  Macmullen  threw  life  into  everything  at  S. 
Saviour's;  but  it  was  not  the  sort  of  life  of  which 
the  vicar  of  Leeds  approved.  Among  other  things 
he  preached  a  sermon  advocating  the  doctrine  of  the 
Intercession  of  Saints.  Bp.  Longley  was  informed 
of  his  so  doing.  Hook  wrote  indignantly  to  Pusey: 
"You  have  sent  Mr.  Macmullen  here,  and  he  is 
acting  as  curate  without  the  bishop's  license.  I 
hope  the  bishop,  now  that  he  knows  about  this,  will 
send  him  to  the  right-about,  so  that  when,  having 


154  The  Anglican  Revival. 

done  Romish  work  in  England,  he  goes  over  to  the 
Popish  Church,  where  his  heart  is,  he  may  not  refer 
to  this  clandestine  act  as  a  proof  that  there  is  no 
discipline  among  us."  Pusey  replies  with  touching 
humility  that  '^  there  is  some  dreadful  misunderstand- 
ing somewhere.  We  have  been  labouring  together 
these  many  years  for  one  common  mother.  .  .  . 
And  now  let  me  tell  you,  my  dear  friend,  that  I 
stand  on  no  other  ground  than  yourself,  that  of  Ken, 
Andrewes,  and  Bramhall,  the  primitive,  undivided 
church."  And  then  he  tells  him  that  he  is  *' quite 
sure"  that  the  S.  Saviour's  clergy  are  ''devoted  ser- 
vants ofour  church";  and  writes  a  little  later:  ''I  have 
entire  confidence  in  Ward  as  a  loyal  son  of  the 
Church  of  England".  Hook  was  not  satisfied.  *'I 
complain",  he  writes,  ''of  your  building  a  church, 
and  getting  a  foot  in  my  parish  to  propagate  prin- 
ciples which  I  detest,  having  come  under  the  plea 
of  assisting  me  in  propagating  principles  which  I 
uphold;  of  your  having  selected  one  to  oppose  me 
and  my  principles,  who  approached  me  as  a  friend, 
and  who  now  admits  that  in  so  doing  he  did  wrong, 
and  that  before  he  undertook  to  oppose  me  by 
causing  a  division  in  Leeds,  he  ought  to  have 
reflected  that  he  was  not  the  proper  person  to  be 
your  agent";  and  a  little  later,  "Depend  upon  it 
that  you  are  mistaken  in  Macmullen".  The  sequel 
soon  showed  that  Hook  was  right,  for  within  six 
days  (Dec.  30,  1846)  he  writes  again:  "Macmullen 
and  his  dupes  have  gone  over  to  the  Mother  of 


Dean  Hook.  155 

Abominations".  Then  Charles  Marriott,  as  one  of 
the  trustees  of  S.  Saviour's,  is  sent  over  to  Leeds, 
and  reports  (Jan.  7,  1847):  "There  was  more  to 
complain  of  here  than  you  thought  for  through 
Macmullen's  indiscretion  (to  say  the  least).  The 
bishop  was  right  in  strongly  pressing  his  removal." 
Mr.  Ward  resigned  the  living,  and  Pusey  wrote  to 
Hook:  **  I  own  myself  quite  mistaken  about  Mac- 
mullen,  and  that  I  did  much  mischief  in  sending 
him  to  Leeds.  About  Ward  you  were  right  so  far, 
that  it  was  of  importance  that  he  should  have  good 
Anglicans  about  him.  .  .  .  Macmullen  took  the  lead 
(as  being  intellectually  a  superior  person)  in  a  way 
he  ought  not."^  Hook,  warm-hearted  and  impul- 
sive as  ever,  wrote  back  in  the  old  terms  of  affection, 
but  added:  "The  chief  damage  done  to  me  is  one 
in  which  you  cannot  sympathize.  I  have  lost  the 
confidence  of  the  good  old  church-and-king  men, 
who  used  to  support  me  because  they  thought  me 
a  supporter  of  our  constitution  in  church  and  state." 
Mr.  Ward  soon  went  over  to  Rome,  and  by  1850, 
**  out  of  fifteen  clergy  who  had  been  connected  with 
S.  Saviour's  since  its  consecration  nine  had  now 
seceded.  Only  one  remained  at  his  post  after  the 
collapse  of  i85i."2 

Such,  in  brief,  is  the  history  of  this  painful  epi- 
sode. It  has  been  thought  right  to  dwell  upon  it 
at  some  length  because  it  is  only  fair  to  touch  upon 
the  weak  as  well  as  the  strong  side  of  the  movement, 

*  UJe  of  Pusey,  iJL  131.  '  Li^e  of  Hook,  p.  453. 


156  The  Anglican  Revival. 

and  also  because  it  illustrates  some  of  the  difficulties 
which  had  to  be  grappled  with  in  so  complex  a 
situation. 

One  feels  a  sort  of  sympathy  with  both  the  chief 
actors.  On  the  one  hand,  who  can  help  feeling  for 
Dr.  Pusey,  who  in  the  simplicity  of  his  heart  only 
wished  to  do  good,  without  the  slightest  regard  for 
the  praise  of  men?  For  the  fact  that  he  was  the 
sole  founder  of  the  church  at  a  cost  of  ;^6ooo  was 
kept  a  profound  secret.  It  was  only  known  to  be 
the  work  of  *'a  penitent".  The  whole  scheme 
caused  him  the  utmost  difficulty  and  annoyance; 
but  he  never  faltered ;  he  submitted  with  meekness 
to  the  reproaches  which  were  cast  upon  him;  he 
owned  his  mistakes,  and  never  attempted  to  palliate 
them  or  explain  them  away.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  showed  a  strange  want  of  judgment  and 
of  insight  into  the  characters  of  men. 

There  was  certainly  very  much  to  be  said  for 
Hook's  side  of  the  question.  He  has  been  charged 
with  hesitation,  changeableness,  timidity.  But  is 
this  quite  fair?  The  result  amply  justified  his  fears. 
In  plain  words,  he  feared  the  S.  Saviour's  men 
were  going  to  Rome,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they 
did  go  to  Rome.  It  may  be  that  his  stiffness,  his 
invectives,  his  vehemence  precipitated  the  catas- 
trophe. Mr.  Macmullen  distinctly  said  that  he 
owed  his  conversion  to  Dr.  Hook,  who  had  opened 
his  eyes  to  the  real  character  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land.    But,  really,  what  weak-kneed  Anglicans  the 


Dean  Hook.  157 

men  must  have  been  to  be  driven  over  the  border 
by  such  a  cause !  And  if  ever  there  was  provoca- 
tion for  vehemence — violence,  if  you  will — surely 
Dr.  Hook  had  that  provocation.  For  nearly  ten 
years  he  had  been  fighting  the  battle  of  church 
principles  against  the  incessant  and  bitter  cry  that 
these  principles  were  Roman,  not  Anglican.  He 
had  succeeded,  as  no  living  clergyman  had  then 
done,  in  commending  those  principles  to  a  vast 
town  population  which  had  previously  had  not  the 
faintest  idea  what  they  were,  and  which,  when  it 
first  heard  of  them,  had  been  violently  set  against 
them.  This  **timid"  man  had  manfully  fought  his 
way,  through  evil  report  and  good  report,  had 
won  a  confidence  and  achieved  a  position  which 
no  other  parish  priest  in  England  had.  And  now 
the  whole  work  seemed  to  be  upset,  and  that  by 
his  own  familiar  friend.  The  secessions  from  S. 
Saviour's  again  brought  down  upon  him  those 
storms  of  abuse  which  his  own  courage,  tact,  and 
good  judgment  had  quite  lulled.  And  he  had 
foreseen  it  all,  and  forewarned  the  doer  of  it  all. 
Happily  he  soon  recovered  from  the  blow,  but  that 
it  was  a  blow,  and  a  blow  under  which  he  reeled 
again,  is  surely  indisputable. 

Looking  at  the  matter  from  another  point  of  view, 
we  may  observe  that  it  emphasized  a  difference  be- 
tween Puseyand  the  school  which  Pusey represented, 
and  Hook  and  the  school  which  Hook  represented. 
The  two  schools  certainly  regarded  both  the  Church 


158  The  Anglican  Revival. 

of  Rome  and  the  Church  of  England  in  different 
lights.  To  Pusey  the  former  was  a  church  in  error, 
but  a  real  church,  and  one  which  he  fondly  hoped 
might  abandon  those  errors,  and  be  reunited  with 
us.  To  Hook  she  was  simply  '*the  Mother  of 
Abominations  " ;  he  would  cordially  have  re-echoed 
the  sentiment  of  Bishop  Hall,  *'No  peace  with 
Rome  ". 

Again,  in  regard  to  the  Church  of  England,  Hook 
was  an  optimist,  Pusey,  if  not  exactly  a  pessimist, 
at  any  rate,  one  who  was  very  far  indeed  from  re- 
garding her  as  '*  without  spot  or  blemish,  or  any 
such  thing  ".  His  spiritual  father  had,  as  we  have 
seen,  in  The  Christian  Year  always  regarded  the 
church  as  in  a  state  of  decay.  Hook,  on  the  other 
hand,  thought  and  said  that  ^^the  church  and  her 
liturgy  were  absolutely  excellent".^  Pusey  very 
clearly  indicated  the  difference  between  them  in 
this  respect  in  a  letter  written  to  Hook  in  1845: 
^*  In  you  and  Jelf,  Churton,  Palmer,  Gresley,  there 
is  a  tone  of  easiness  and  satisfaction  with  all  things, 
and  an  inaptitude  to  see  what  is  amiss ;  a  want  of 
the  element  of  austerity,  severity  ".^  Accordingly 
Hook  was  a  very  much  stiffer  Anglican  than  Pusey 
was;  the  latter  always  had  great  sympathy  with 
the  Evangelicals,  the  former — none. 

The  difference  in  part  arose  from  the  very  different 
situations  in  which  the  two  men  were  placed.  Pusey 
took  the  theoretical,  Hook  the  practical  view  of  the 

» See  Life  of  Hook,  p.  14a.  *  Life  of  Pusey,  ii.  497. 


Dean  Hook.  159 

subject.  Pusey  was  essentially  a  student,  Hook, 
though  a  great  reader,  was  really  more  at  home  as 
a  worker.  Both  held  that  the  Primitive  Church 
was  the  true  model  for  the  Church  of  England;  but 
Pusey  knew  very  much  better  what  the  Primitive 
Church  really  was  than  Hook  did ;  he  had  studied 
it  far  more  deeply,  and  with  less  prejudice. 

On  the  other  hand,  Hook  was  a  more  practical 
man  in  every  way  than  Pusey.  Any  theory  he  held 
was  bound  to  be  a  working  theory;  otherwise  it  was 
useless  for  his  purpose.  This  was  one  of  the  secrets 
of  his  success.  A  man  who  was  to  make  any  deep 
impression  upon  such  places  as  Leeds  and  Coven- 
try must  have  very  sharp,  clear-cut  convictions. 
There  was  the  definite  church  system  which  he 
desired  to  recommend.  If  that  system  did  not  in 
all  points  agree  with  the  Primitive  Church — so 
much  the  worse  for  the  Primitive  Church.  He 
could  not  afford  to  have  much  sympathy  with  those 
who  did  not  agree  with  him;  for  such  sympathy 
was,  as  far  as  it  went,  a  playing  into  the  hands  of 
the  enemy.  It  was  all  very  well  for  Pusey,  sitting 
in  his  study,  or  in  contact  only  with  men  who  were 
like-minded  with  himself,  to  love  and  sympathize 
with  the  Evangelicals,  or  to  be  very  friendly  towards 
Dissenters,  with  whom  he  was  never  brought  into 
collision.  But  how  could  Hook  do  this  at  Leeds, 
where,  as  he  says,  **  There  are  bitter  enemies,  the 
Peculiars" — [the  name  given  by  the  Oriel  men  at 
the  commencement  of  the  movement  to  the  Evan- 


i6o  The  Anglican  Revival. 

gelicals] — *' whose  bitterness  is  beyond  all  descrip- 
tion, ready  to  watch  each  trip  that  is  made"?^  How 
could  he  fraternize  with  Dissenters,  when  he  had 
been  forced  to  give  this  advice  to  a  clergyman  about 
them:  *^  Keep  aloof  from  Dissenters  as  persons  of 
a  different  religion"?^  Hook  perfectly  well  under- 
stood that  he  was  on  a  lower  intellectual  level  than 
Pusey,  as  the  following  words  in  a  letter  written  by 
him  in  1843  show:  ^*The  great  men  of  a  school 
only  write  for  the  initiated.  The  little  men,  the 
retail  dealers  in  divinity,  apply  to  the  great  men 
through  their  writings  for  wholesale  divinity."* 
Among  the  great  men  he  places  Pusey  and  New- 
man ;  among  the  little,  Gresley,  Paget,  and  himself. 
But,  as  a  retail  dealer  in  divinity,  he  took  the  privi- 
lege, which  all  retail  dealers  take,  of  selecting  only 
those  goods  from  the  wholesale  dealers  which  he 
required.  It  seems  necessary  to  dwell  upon  those 
differences,  because  they  were  the  differences  not 
merely  of  two  individuals,  but  of  two  representative 
men,  each  of  whom  had  a  vast  number  of  stanch 
churchmen  who,  more  or  less,  harmonized  with 
him.  Both  parties  were  agreed  on  the  main  points, 
and  both  were  factors  in  the  movement  we  are 
considering. 

Before  concluding  this  rather  painful  episode  it  is 
a  comfort  to  add  that  the  old  affectional  relationship 
between  Hook  and  Pusey  was  restored  before  the 
end  came.     In  1873,  when  both  were  old  men.  Hook 

^Li/e,  p.  302.  *Jd.,  p.  189.  *  Life  of  Pusey,  ii.  375. 


Dean  Hook.  i6i 

sent  a  message  to  Pusey  through  Liddon,  ''Can 
you  tell  that  saint  whom  England  persecuted,  our 
dearly  beloved  Pusey,  that  I  should  like,  as  I  am 
passing  out  of  this  world,  to  be  permitted  to  renew 
the  friendship  with  him  which  in  our  youthful  days 
was  my^joy  and  crown  of  rejoicing?"  Pusey  wrote 
at  once  to  Hook  to  thank  him  for  his  'Moving  mes- 
sage", and  added,  "  What  a  long  life  of  friendship 
it  has  been  since  1819,  when  I  used  to  come  down 
from  my  garret  in  Peckwater.  ...  I  am  so  sorry  that 
some  whom  I  sent  to  S.  Saviour's  worried  you.  .  .  . 
I  always  studied  you,  though  I  was  misinformed  in 
two  cases.  "^ 

Dr.  Hook  was  also  a  representative  man,  in  being 
perhaps  the  first,  and  certainly  the  most  prominent 
and  successful,  of  those  who  applied  the  principles 
of  the  movement  to  the  practical  work  of  a  large 
parish.  The  parish  responded  to  the  touch,  as  very 
many  other  parishes  have  since  done;  for  in  no 
respect  have  the  results  of  the  movement  been  more 
conspicuous  than  in  the  increased  energy  and  effi- 
ciency shown  in  plain,  practical,  parochial  work. 

As  Dr.  Hook  is  a  palmary  instance  of  what  a 
man  imbued  with  the  principles  of  the  Anglican 
movement  may  do  in  the  parish,  so  is  Dr.  Wilber- 
force  of  what  may  be  done  in  that  larger  unit,  the 
diocese. 

Samuel  Wilberforce  (1805- 1873)  has  been  termed, 
with  good  reason,  "The  Remodeller  of  the  Episco- 

*  Life  of  Pusey,  iv.  260. 
(11420)  L 


i62  The  Anglican  Revival. 

pate".^  Not  that  this  implies  that  there  were  no 
good,  active  bishops  at  the  time  when  he  was 
appointed  to  the  see  of  Oxford  (1845).  On  the 
contrary,  there  were  then  prelates  on  the  bench 
who  would  have  been  an  honour  to  any  age  of  the 
church.  Bishop  Blomfield  had  been  a  thoroughly 
hard-working  bishop  for  more  than  twenty  years; 
Wilberforce's  own  diocesan.  Bishop  Charles  Sum- 
ner, was  no  idler  at  Winchester,  nor  was  his  brother 
Bishop  J.  B.  Sumner,  at  Chester;  Bishop  Denison's 
industry  and  liberality  in  the  diocese  of  Salisbury 
were  immense;  Bishop  Kaye  at  Lincoln  was  a  very 
high  type  of  bishop,  both  intellectually  and  spiritu- 
ally; Bishop  Lonsdale  was  presiding  with  extra- 
ordinary success  over  the  diocese  of  Lichfield ;  and 
others  might  be  named.  But  in  spite  of  all  this, 
Bishop  Wilberforce  set  a  new  standard  of  episco- 
pal work,  which  cannot  be  better  described  than  in 
the  words  of  Canon  Ashwell:  **  Samuel  Wilber- 
force*s  idea  of  Episcopacy  with  which  he  set  out 
was  his  own.  The  Bishop  was  to  be  as  much  the 
mainspring  of  all  spiritual  and  religious  energy  in 
his  diocese  as  a  parochial  clergyman  is  bound  to  be 
in  his  parish.  His  duty  was  to  supply  not  only 
counsel  to  his  clergy,  but  also  that  momentum  which 
the  sense  of  real  supervision  supplies,  to  care  for 
the  diocese  as  a  whole,  to  learn  for  himself  where 
needs  existed,  to  take  the  necessary  steps  for  sup- 

^  Dean  Burgon,  Lives  of  Twelve  Good  Men,  "Samuel  Wilberforce,  The 
Remodeller  of  the  Episcopate". 


Bishop  Wilberforce.  163 

plying  those  needs,  and  to  take  care  also  that  it  was 
known  that  he  so  acted,  and  that  he  was  at  all  times 
not  only  accessible  to  all  men,  but  also  ready  per- 
sonally to  investigate  on  the  spot  any  case  that  was 
brought  before  him."^  If  exception  be  taken  to 
this  testimony  as  merely  the  testimony  of  an  admir- 
ing biographer,  the  evidence  of  Mr.  (Sir  William) 
Palmer  can  hardly  be  suspected ;  for  he  was  by  no 
means  an  indiscriminate  admirer  of  Samuel  Wil- 
berforce. He  was  a  singularly  different  type  of 
man  himself,  one  who  had  no  sympathy  whatever 
with  some  of  Wilberforce's  leading  characteristics; 
and,  in  fact,  as  he  frankly  owns,  had  to  overcome  a 
considerable  prejudice,  which  those  who  know  the 
minds  of  the  two  men  can  well  understand.  But 
this  is  his  deliberate  conviction:  "I  must  confess 
that  for  many  years  I  did  not  feel  any  confidence  in 
Wilberforce;  I  thought  he  courted  popularity  too 
much;  I  could  not  depend  on  his  principles.  But 
my  objections  were  swept  away  by  contemplating 
his  truly  magnificent  course  of  exertion  in  the  cause 
of  the  Church  of  England.  He  not  only  afforded 
a  grand  example  of  what  Christianity  can  do,  but 
electrified  the  whole  church  by  it.  He  stirred  it  up 
to  a  new  life.  ,  .  .  Bishop  Wilberforce  had  a  greater 
influence  in  reviving  the  Church  of  England  than 
any  of  his  contemporaries.  .  .  -  Newman  laid  the 
foundation,  but  Wilberforce  built  up  the  temple. 
Wilberforce  realized  in  the  face  of  the  world,  high 

» Life  of  Bishop  S.  Wilberforce,  I.  344. 


164  The  Anglican  Revival. 

and  low,  the  true  ideal  of  a  Christian  Episcopate  in 
the  Church  of  England — a  model  which  was  to  fur- 
nish an  example  to  all  ages  of  the  church ;  but  never 
to  be  rivalled  or  approached  again.  Wilberforce's 
work  was  exactly  what  we  needed;  a  combination 
of  the  practical  with  the  theoretical;  it  led  men 
away  from  barren  controversies  and  mutual  mis- 
understandings to  a  holier  emulation — a  rivalry  in 
good  works."  ^  It  is  unnecessary  to  add  the  evi- 
dence of  Dean  Burgon  to  the  same  effect.  Indeed, 
the  fact  is  patent,  and,  as  in  the  case  of  Dr.  Hook, 
the  only  difficulty  in  realizing  the  extent  of  his  suc- 
cess, is  because  he  was  successful;  others  followed 
in  his  wake,  and  the  standard,  which  was  then  abso- 
lutely unique,  has  become  a  common  one. 

But  here  a  question  arises,  Can  Samuel  Wilber- 
force  be  fairly  regarded  as  a  product  of  the  Anglican 
movement?  With  the  Tractarians  as  a  party  he 
carefully  abstained  from  identifying  himself,  and 
not  only  spoke  language,  but  did  acts,  which  marked 
his  strong  disapproval  of  them.  But  (though  per- 
haps he  would  himself  have  denied  it)  his  episcopal 
character  was  surely  formed  in  the  Oxford  school. 
We  can  scarcely  imagine  him  being  what  he  was  if 
there  had  been  no  movement,  and  if  he  himself  had 
not  been  deeply  affected  by  that  movement.  Never 
perhaps  was  there  a  man  who  was  more  distracted 
by  conflicting  influences  than  Samuel  Wilberforce; 

1  Supplement  to  Narrative  of  Events  connected  with  the  publication  of  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times  (written  in  1883),  pp.  255-7. 


Bishop  Wilberforce.  165 

and  some  injustice  has  been  done  to  him  through 
not  taking  these  influences  into  account.  His  early- 
training  was  among  **the  Clapham  sect".  His  love 
and  admiration  for  his  father,  its  lay  leader,  were  un- 
bounded.^ From  his  twelfth  year  he  carefully  kept  his 
father's  letters,  which  at  last  amounted  to  no  less  than 
six  hundred.  When  he  was  thirty-seven  years  old,  an 
age  at  which  a  man's  views  are  presumably  settled, 
he  disclaimed  indignantly  any  identification  of  him- 
self with  the  tract-writers:  **  My  general  tone  is 
unlike  theirs  and  against  their  peculiar  views.  My 
opinions  have  been  formed  in  a  far  different  school. 
They  are  those  of  my  beloved  father. "^  His  early 
patron  and  most  kind  and  constant  friend  was  that 
pronounced  anti-Tractarian,  Bishop  Sumner  of  Win- 
chester, who  gave  him,  when  he  was  only  twenty- 
five  years  of  age,  the  valuable  living  of  Brightstone, 
frequently  interchanged  visits  with  him,  made  him, 
when  he  was  only  thirty -four.  Archdeacon  of 
Surrey,  and  in  the  following  year  (1840)  rector  of 
Alverstoke.  In  1841  became  under  court  influence, 
being  nominated  by  Prince  Albert  as  his  chaplain ; 
and  for  some  years  he  was  a  **  persona  grata"  in 
the  highest  quarters,  both  as  a  preacher  and  as  a 
personal  friend.  This  would  be,  in  a  different  way, 
as  antagonistic  to  the  development  of  Tractarian- 
ism  as  the  influence  of  his  father  and  of  Bishop 

•  "The  Wilbcrforces  started  with  the  immense  and  very  rare  advantage 
of  perfect  confidence  and  openness  with  their  father.  He  was  the  joy  of 
their  life  and  the  light  of  their  eyes." — T.  Mozley,  Reminiscences,  chiefly  of 
Oriel  College,  &c.,  i.  iia  ^  Life  of  Bishop  S.  Wilberforce,  i.  217. 


i66  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Sumner.  Then  he  married  Miss  Emily  Sargent, 
the  daughter  of  a  leading  Evangelical ;  and  though 
he  lost  her  very  soon,  he  almost  worshipped  her 
memory,  and  would  be  little  inclined  to  show  any 
tendency  which  would  be  distasteful  to  the  Sargent 
tradition.  Again,  he  was  placed  in  a  most  painful 
position  as  an  English  clergyman  by  the  fact  that 
many  of  his  nearest  and  dearest  relatives — his  three 
brothers,  his  two  brothers-in-law,  his  only  daughter 
and  her  husband — went  over  to  Rome.  So  far  from 
having  the  faintest  inclination  to  follow  them,  their 
defections,  culminating  in  that  of  his  eldest  brother, 
Robert  Isaac,  whom  he  loved  and  respected  more 
almost  than  any  human  being,  filled  him  with  an 
ever-increasing  abhorrence  of  Rome  and  everything 
that  tended  towards  it.  Perhaps  also  he  felt  bound 
to  vindicate  himself  from  any  suspicion  that  Roman- 
izing ran,  as  it  were,  in  the  blood,  by  making  vigor- 
ous and  constant  protests,  and  adopting  courses  of 
action  in  accordance  with  those  protests.  But  protest 
as  he  would,  the  Low  Churchmen,  who  in  the  early 
years  of  his  episcopate  still  formed  the  largest  and 
most  influential  party  in  the  church,  never  regarded 
him  as  their  friend.  And  they  were  right;  for  in 
spite  of  his  manifestly  sincere  expressions  of  devo- 
tion to  his  father's  memory,  the  unbounded  influence 
which  he  exercised  in  his  diocese  all  tended  to  under- 
mine the  power  of  that  party  of  which  his  father  had 
been  the  lay  chief.  The  work  in  the  Oxford  diocese 
which  really  told  was  work  done  on  High  Church 


The  Hampden  and  Gorham  Cases.        167 

lines,  and  the  life  and  soul  of  that  work  was  Bishop 
Wilberforce.  He  was  hardly  long  enough  at  Win- 
chester to  make  the  same  impression  there,  and,  in 
spite  of  his  higher  dignity,  he  will  always  be  known 
as  par  excellence  ^^the  Bishop  of  Oxford".  There 
is  another  side  to  his  career  in  that  capacity,  in 
which  he  was  by  no  means  so  successful ;  that  side 
will  come  painfully  before  us  in  the  next  chapter. 

The  increased  efficiency  both  in  parochial  and 
diocesan  work  which  may  be  fairly  attributed  to 
the  Anglican  movement  will  be  noticed  in  a  later 
chapter.  To  give  instances  at  this  stage  of  the 
movement  would  hardly  be  in  accordance  with 
chronological  order.  For  the  vast  changes  of  which 
Dr.  Hook  and  Dr.  Wilberforce  were  the  pioneers 
did  not  come  into  full  and  general  operation  until 
after  the  two  famous  cases  of  Dr.  Hampden  and 
Mr.  Gorham. 


Chapter  VIII. 

The  Hampden  and  Gorham  Cases  and  their 
results. 

It  should  be  carefully  borne  in  mind  that  the 
Church  movement  and  the  Tract  movement  are  not 
identical.  The  Tract-writers,  indeed,  gave  the  first 
impulse  to  the  movement;  without  them  it  might 
never  have  taken  place,  at  any  rate  in  the  form  in 
which  it  did  take  place.     But  they  themselves  would 


i68  The  Anglican  Revival. 

have  been  the  first  to  own  that  their  work  was  to 
revive  the  old,  not  to  introduce  the  new.  They 
contended  that  they  had  at  their  backs  the  really 
great  divines  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  those 
divines  would  have  been  there,  ready  for  use,  whether 
the  Tracts  had  been  written  or  not.  Thus  the  famous 
HampKien  controversy,  which  arose  in  1847,  was  not 
one  in  which  the  so-called  Tractarians  were  ranged 
on  one  side  and  their  opponents  on  the  other. 
It  was  convenient  so  to  represent  it,  because  the 
Tractarians  were  still  the  unpopular  party,  and  to 
raise  a  cry  of  Puseyism  was  still  the  most  effectual 
weapon  that  could  be  used  against  any  cause.  But 
the  real  point  at  issue  both  in  the  Hampden  and 
the  Gorham  cases  was  this :  Is  the  Church,  because 
she  is  established,  to  be  overridden  by  the  State  in  a 
way  that  no  sect  in  the  kingdom  would  tolerate  for 
one  moment?  And  to  this  question  many  church- 
men who  had  no  sympathy  whatever  with  the 
Tractarians  as  a  party,  answered  emphatically '*  No". 
At  the  same  time,  as  in  the  commencement  of  the 
movement,  so  now,  it  was  the  Tractarians  who  stood 
in  the  forefront  of  the  battle.  Lord  John  Russell 
was  not  far  wrong  when  he  said;  **Dr.  Pusey 
must  be  considered  as  the  leader  and  oracle  of  Dr. 
Hampden's  opponents".^  These  points  will  be  amply 
illustrated  in  the  details  of  the  two  cases. 

On  November  15,   1847,  it  was  announced,  that 
the  premier,  Lord  John  Russell,  had  recommended 

»  Life  of  Bishop  S.  Wilberforce,  i.  459. 


The  Hampden  Case.  169 

to  the  crown  the  appointment  of  Dr.  R.  D.  Hamp- 
den, Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Oxford,  to  the 
bishopric  of  Hereford,  in  the  room  of  Dr.  Musgrave, 
translated  to  York.  It  will  be  remembered  that  Dr. 
Hampden  lay  under  the  censure  of  his  own  Uni- 
versity, passed  in  1836,  and  confirmed  by  a  vain 
attempt  to  remove  it  in  1842.  The  premier  must 
have  known  that  those  who  objected  to  Dr.  Hamp- 
den being  a  professor  of  divinity,  would  a  fortiori 
object  to  his  being  a  bishop;  he  must  also  have 
known  that  as  the  opposition  to  the  lower  appoint- 
ment was  not  confined  to  the  Tractarian  party,  so 
neither  would  the  opposition  to  the  higher.  But 
he  thought  the  appointment  *'was  calculated  to 
strengthen  the  Protestant  character  of  our  Church, 
so  seriously  threatened  of  late  by  many  defections  to 
the  Church  of  Rome";^  and  therefore  he  persisted 
in  his  recommendation  in  spite  of  remonstrances 
from  all  quarters. 

The  Timesy  which  was  a  very  fair  index  of  popular 
opinion,  expressed  its  astonishment;  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Howley)  and  the  Bishop  of  Ripon 
(Dr.  Longley)  wrote  in  conjunction  a  strong  letter  to 
the  premier  on  their  own  account;  and  a  **  Remon- 
strance", signed  by  thirteen  bishops,  among  whom 
were  some  who  had  taken  an  active  part  against  the 
Tractarians,  was  also  sent  to  him.  The  Christian 
ObscrveVy  the  monthly  organ  of  the  Evangelicals, 
declared  that  **it  was  hardly  fair  to  the  church  to 

1  Life  of  Bishop  S.  Wilberforce,  p.  440. 


170  The  Anglican  Revival. 

nominate  to  a  bishopric  one  who  was  lying  under  the 
recorded  censure  of  his  University,  a  censure  pro- 
nounced by  all  parties  in  the  church";  and  *' could 
not  be  surprised  that  the  appointment  had  been 
viewed  with  regret  and  disappointment  by  all  par- 
ties".^ The  Record^  the  weekly  organ  of  the  same 
party,  declared  that,  as  it  had  been  *Moud  to  de- 
nounce" Dr.  Hampden's  writings,  it  had  "no  dis- 
position to  depart  from  the  allegations  then  made". 
Even  among  the  Broad  Churchmen,  where  Dr. 
Hampden  might  have  expected  to  find  his  warmest 
sympathizers,  a  leading  representative,  Julius  Hare, 
"deplored  and  condemned  the  appointment  as  a 
most  injudicious  measure  on  the  part  of  the  minis- 
ter,— as  a  wanton  outrage  on  the  feelings,  preju- 
dices they  might  be,  but  still  strong  and  earnest 
feelings,  of  a  large  body  of  the  church,  especially  of 
the  clergy, — as  an  act  which  would  infallibly  arouse 
vehement  opposition,  and  break  up  the  peace  of  the 
church  at  a  time  when  we  were  hoping  for  something 
like  a  lull  after  the  storms  of  late  years ";2  though, 
at  the  same  time,  he  defended  Dr.  Hampden  per- 
sonally. Hence  it  was  hardly  accurate  to  call  the 
opposition,  as  Dr.  Hampden  called  it,  *'a  Trac- 
tarian  persecution";  at  the  same  time  there  is  no 
doubt  that  the  strongest  opposition  came  from  those 
who  were  more  or  less  connected  with  the  Anglican 

»"View  of  Public  Affairs"  in  the  appendix  to  the  Christian  Observer  for 
December,  1847. 

2  Letter  to  the  Dean  ol  Chichester  (Dr.  Chandler)  on  the  appointment  of 
Dr.  Hampden  to  the  see  of  Hereford. 


The  Hampden  Case.  171 

movement,  especially  from   Pusey,  Keble,  Charles 
Marriott,  and  J.  B.  Mozley. 

It  was  an  unfortunate  affair  throughout;  and  not 
the  least  unfortunate  part  of  it  was  that  the  Bishop 
of  Oxford  had,  from  his  position,  to  take  a  pro- 
minent share  in  it;  for  it  was  just  one  of  those  cases 
in  which  the  weak  side  of  the  great  bishop's  char- 
acter would  be  sure  to  come  to  the  front.  Dr. 
Hampden,  as  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity,  held 
the  living  of  Ewelme,  which  was  then  attached  to 
the  professorship;  he  was  therefore  an  incumbent 
in  Bishop  Wilberforce's  diocese;  and  it  was  pur- 
posed to  institute  a  suit  against  him,  under  the 
Church  Discipline  Act  of  1840,  before  his  diocesan 
for  heretical  teaching.  Bishop  Wilberforce  was  one 
of  the  thirteen  bishops  who  had  signed  the  Remon- 
strance to  the  premier  against  the  appointment. 
He  declined,  rightly,  to  promote  the  suit,  but  con- 
sented to  sign  Letters  of  Request  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  to  remit  the  case  to  be  heard  in  his 
Court  of  Arches.  It  was  intended  to  oppose  the 
confirmation  of  Dr.  Hampden  in  Bow  Church,  and 
counsel's  opinion  was  that  **the  opposition  to  con- 
firmation would  have  less  chance  of  being  summarily 
set  aside,  if  there  were  a  suit  pending  in  the  Arches 
Court  which  could  be  referred  to  as  a  ground  of 
objection".^  Bishop  Wilberforce  signed  the  letters 
on  Dec.  16,  regarding  this  simply  as  a  ministerial, 
not  a  judicial  act.     He  then  wrote  to  the  premier, 

*  Letter  of  Rev.  Charles  Marriott  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  Dec.  4,  1847. 


172  The  Anglican  Revival. 

begging  him  to  reconsider  the  appointment,  and  to 
Dr.  Hampden,  asking  him  to  avow  his  reception  of 
ten  articles  which  he  drew  up,  and  to  withdraw  the 
Bampton  Lectures  and  the  Observations  on  Religious 
Dissent -y  but  from  both  he  received  what  can  only 
be  called  **a  snub".  Then  came  the  last  scene  in 
the  drama.  The  great  majority  of  the  Heads  of 
Houses  at  Oxford  were  in  favour  of  Dr.  Hampden. 
The  bishop,  when  he  went  to  Oxford  for  his  Decem- 
ber ordination,  stayed  with  the  wariest  of  them  all, 
Dr.  Hawkins,  who  worked  upon  him  by  telling  him 
that  Dr.  Hampden's  pamphlet  was  being  sold  with- 
out its  writer's  consent,  and  by  persuading  him  to 
re-read  the  Bamptons.  The  result  was  that,  three 
days  later,  the  bishop  withdrew  his  Letters  of  Re- 
quest, which  practically  put  an  end  to  the  Hampden 
case.  This  drew  upon  him  a  storm  of  abuse,  and 
one  of  those  crushing  letters  from  Bishop  Phillpotts 
of  Exeter,  which  that  very  able  prelate  knew  so  well 
how  to  write.  Canon  Ashwell  amply  clears  the  good 
bishop's  memory  from  any  fair  charge  of  double- 
dealing  or  insincerity,  but  hardly  from  weakness. 
The  broad  facts  remain  that  he  signed  a  remon- 
strance against  the  nomination,  gave  his  sanction 
for  the  commencement  of  a  suit  against  the  nominee, 
and  then  withdrew  that  sanction.  The  plea  that  he 
granted  the  Letters  of  Request  under  the  idea  that 
he  had  no  power  to  refuse,  and  only  withdrew  them 
when  he  was  legally  advised  ito  the  contrary,  saves 
his  honesty  at  the  expense  of  his  strength;  for  does 


The  Gorham  Case.  173 

it  not  argue  weakness  in  a  man  in  such  a  position 
to  do  an  important  act  without  knowing  his  own 
powers?  The  sequel  is  quickly  told.  At  the  elec- 
tion of  Dr.  Hampden,  two  votes  (one  being  the 
dean's)  out  of  fourteen  were  given  against  him,  and 
at  the  confirmation  of  that  election  at  Bow  Church 
the  absurd  farce  was  gone  through  of  inviting  objec- 
tions, and  when  the  objectors  were  prepared  to  give 
them,  refusing  to  hear  them.  The  Hampden  case 
fell  through,  but  not  without  leaving  a  sore  which 
long  rankled  in  the  minds  of  many  churchmen. 

That  sore  was  exasperated  by  another  case  which 
in  point  of  date  overlapped  that  of  Dr.  Hampden. 
On  Nov.  2,  1847,  the  Rev.  G.  C.  Gorham  was 
presented  by  the  lord  chancellor  to  the  living  of 
Brampford  Speke  in  the  diocese  of  Exeter.  He 
had  the  year  before  been  presented  to  another  living 
in  the  same  diocese  (S.  Just-in-Penwith),  and  the 
bishop  had  reason  to  believe  that  he  held  views, 
especially  on  the  subject  of  Holy-Baptism,  which 
he  deemed  inconsistent  with  the  formularies  of  the 
church.  He  therefore  insisted  upon  his  undoubted 
right  to  examine  a  priest  before  instituting  him  to  a 
benefice.  The  examination  commenced  on  Dec.  17, 
lasted  fourdays,and  was  then  postponed  until  March, 
when  it  was  resumed  for  three  days,  no  less  than 
one  hundred  and  forty  questions  being  set  in  all. 
The  bishop  was  dissatisfied  with  the  result.  Mr. 
Gorham  brought  the  case  before  the  Court  of  Arches, 
where  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust,  after  a  very  long 


174  '^^^  Anglican  Revival. 

interval,  gave  judgment  against  him  (Aug.  2,  1849). 
Mr.  Gorham  appealed  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
the  Privy  Council,  who  reversed  the  decision  of  the 
Court  of  Arches  (March  8,  1850).  The  Bishop  of 
Exeter  still  refused  to  institute,  and  Mr.  Gorham 
was  instituted  by  the  Dean  of  Arches  acting  for 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Bishop  Phillpotts 
applied  in  vain  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  the 
Court  of  Common  Pleas,  and  the  Court  of  Ex- 
chequer; and  the  matter  dropped. 

The  Hampden  and  the  Gorham  cases,  but  espe- 
cially the  latter,  had  an  important  bearing  upon  the 
movement  in  more  ways  than  one. 

In  the  first  place  they  rallied  churchmen  together 
who  had  for  some  time  not  been  quite  in  sympathy 
— or  at  any  rate  represented  different  sections  of 
the  movement.  In  1847,  when  the  rumour  of  Dr. 
Hampden's  appointment  spread,  Dr.  Pusey  wrote 
to  Archdeacon  Churton,  the  biographer  of  Joshua 
Watson,  and  an  excellent  specimen  of  the  old- 
fashioned  High  Churchman,  saying:  *'  It  seems  as 
if  this  trouble  were  allowed  to  bring  together  by  a 
common  pressure  those  who  were  scattered".^  And 
the  event  showed  that  Dr.  Pusey  was  right.  For 
instance,  the  Bishopof  Exeter  had  never  quite  thrown 
himself  into  the  movement;  but  now  he  and  Pusey 
and  Keble  worked  shoulder  to  shoulder.  He  sup- 
ported Pusey  heartily  in  the  matter  of  Miss  Sellon 
and  the  sisterhood  at  Devonport  in  1849;  and  Pusey 

^  Life  of  Pusey,  iii.  i6o. 


The  Hampden  and  Gorham  Cases.        175 

helped  him  largely  in  the  theological  questions 
which  arose  out  of  the  Gorham  case,  and,  in  fact, 
supplied  him  with  materials  for  his  famous  **  Letter 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  "  in  relation  to  that 
case.  Keble  sympathized  with  the  bishop  so  en- 
tirely that,  after  the  series  of  defeats  noted  above, 
he  again  thought  of  retiring  into  a  position  similar 
to  that  of  the  Nonjurors. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  two  cases  led  to  another 
series  of  secessions  to  Rome.  Among  these  seceders 
by  far  the  most  eminent  v^2iS Henry  Edward  Manning 
(1808- 1 892),  afterwards  Cardinal-priest  and  Roman 
Catholic  Archbishop  of  Westminster.  The  reader 
may  have  been  surprised  that  this  great  name  has 
not  been  mentioned  before ;  but  this  is  a  sketch  of 
the  Anglican  movement,  and  with  that  movement 
Manning  really  had  very  little  to  do;  his  name 
scarcely  ever  occurs  in  the  records  of  its  earlier 
stages.  His  training  was  not  at  all  calculated 
to  make  him  a  prominent  leader  in  any  reli- 
gious movement;  for  in  his  earlier  years  his  views 
appear  to  have  been  in  a  very  fluctuating  state. 
When  he  was  seven  years  old  his  family  removed 
from  Totteridge  to  Combe  Bank,  Sundridge,  where 
Christopher  Wordsworth  the  elder  had  just  been 
appointed  rector  (18 16).  Manning  became  very 
intimate  with  the  remarkable  family  of  the  Words- 
worths;  but  we  do  not  hear  anything  about  church 
influence  except  that  the  good  rector's  sermons 
seemed  to  him   rather  dull.     In   1822  he  went  to 


176  The  Anglican  RevivaL 

Harrow,  where,  he  says,  "the  services  in  the  church 
for  most  of  the  boys  were  worse  than  useless",*  and 
where  the  religious  instruction  consisted  in  *' read- 
ing on  Sundays  Waller's  Catechism,  and  Paley's 
Evidences  J  or  Lesley  [sic]  on  Deism''\ — excellent 
books,  no  doubt,  but  hardly  calculated  to  inspire 
a  youth  with  enthusiasm.  In  1827  he  proceeded 
to  Balliol  College,  Oxford,  threw  himself  heartily 
into  the  various  phases  of  undergraduate  life,  and 
became  apparently  a  sort  of  Admirable  Crichton. 
He  was  a  good  cricketer,  an  excellent  oar,  a  very 
brilliant  and  frequent  speaker  at  "The  Union", 
and  distinguished  for  his  social  talents.  With 
all  these  distractions,  however,  he  found  time  for 
reading,  and  by  a  vigorous  effort  at  the  last 
managed  to  secure  a  place  in  the  first  class  in 
Classical  Honours  in  1830.  Charles  Wordsworth, 
the  friend  of  his  boyhood,  who  was  his  private 
tutor,  tells  us  that  "on  leaving  Oxford  Manning's 
religious  opinions  were  quite  unformed";  and  we 
can  easily  believe  it,  for  the  religious  influences 
which  were  brought  to  bear  upon  him  were  of  a 
strangely  varied  character.  First,  there  was  the 
influence  of  his  brother-in-law,  J.  D.  Anderdon, 
who  was  sixteen  years  his  senior,  and  was  partner 
with  his  father  in  the  firm  of  "Manning  and  Ander- 
don". Mr.  Anderdon  was  the  anonymous  author  of 
A  Layman^ s  Life  of  Bishop  Ken,  and  his  influence 
would,  of  course,  be  in  a  strongly  church  direction. 

*  Quoted  in  Purcell's  Life  of  Cardinal  Manning,  i.  i8. 


Results  of  the  Cases.  177 

He  persuaded  Manning-  to  read,  in  the  later  part  of 
his  undergraduate  career,  the  great  English  divines 
of  the  seventeenth  century;  and  in  other  ways  af- 
fected him  really  if  not  deeply.  *'  During  my  time  at 
Oxford",  Manning  writes,  **a  religious  change  had 
come  over  me ;  the  daily  chapel  became  very  sooth- 
ing, especially  the  Psalms  and  Lessons;  I  studied 
for  the  first  time  the  Old  and  New  Testaments;  I 
read  Barrow's  Sermons  with  great  care,  then  Butler^ s 
Analogy  and  Sermons  with  still  greater."  But  he 
gives  1830  as  the  date  of  his  conversion,  and  the 
human  instruments  of  it  two  pious  Evangelicals, 
Mr.  Bevan  and  his  sister  Mrs.  Mortimer,  after- 
wards a  most  successful  educational  writer.^  He 
also  became  intimate  with  some  Quakers,  who  lent 
him  Puritan  books,  such  as  Owen  and  Howe.  Now 
came  the  question  of  a  profession.  **I  had  never", 
he  writes,  **  given  a  thought  to  Orders  or  Apos- 
tolical Succession,  and  had  but  a  vague  conception 
of  the  church;  but  I  had  always  believed  in  Bap- 
tismal Regeneration."  In  183 1  he  first  spoke  to 
Anderdon  about  taking  Holy  Orders;  against  which 
he  had,  by  his  own  account,  a  strong  prejudice  to 
overcome.  **The  thought  of  being  a  clergyman 
was  positively  repulsive  to  me.  I  had  an  intense 
recoil  from  the  secularity  of  the  Established  Church. 
I  can  say  before  God  that  I   had  not  a  spark  of 

*  Perhaps  no  little  books  were  at  one  time  mote  used  to  give  the  earliest 
religious  and  secular  instruction  than  her  Peep  of  Day,  Line  upon  Line, 
More  about  Jesus,  Precept  upon  Precept,  Near  Home,  Far  Ojf,  and  Readinif 
without  Tears. 

(M420)  M 


178  The  Anglican  Revival. 

ecclesiastical  ambition.  The  sight  of  an  apron  and 
of  a  shovel  hat  literally  provoked  me.  The  title 
*  Father  in  God '  applied  to  Bishops  living  at  ease 
irritated  me."  *'I  had  a  drawing  to  Christian 
piety,  but  a  revulsion  from  the  Anglican  Church. 
I  thought  it  secular,  pedantic,  and  unspiritual." 

He  had  been  intended  by  his  father  for  a  clergy- 
man, but  had  begged  off,  and  had  obtained  a  situa- 
tion as  supernumerary  clerk  in  the  Colonial  Office; 
his  ambition  was  to  distinguish  himself  in  parlia- 
mentary life;  but  at  last,  through  the  advice  of  Mrs. 
Mortimer,  he  decided  to  take  orders.  In  April, 
1832,  he  was  elected  Fellow  of  Merton  College,  and 
in  1833  was  ordained,  and  became  assistant  curate 
to  the  Rev.  John  Sargent,  rector  of  Wool  Lavington 
and  Graffham.  Mr.  Sargent  was  a  noted  Evan- 
gelical, and  the  biographer  of  one  of  the  greatest 
saints  in  the  Evangelical  calendar  (Henry  Martyn); 
and  all  the  influences  brought  to  bear  on  Manning 
at  this  time  were  of  an  Evangelical  cast.  He  be- 
came acquainted  with  the  Rev.  Henry  Blunt  of 
Chelsea,  an  excellent  specimen  of  the  Evangelical 
school,  who  gave  him  a  higher  ideal  oi"  the  clerical 
calling.  Mr.  Sargent  had  four  beautiful  daughters, 
one  of  whom  was  married  to  Samuel  Wilberforce. 
Manning  became  engaged  to  another  sister,  Caro- 
line, and  married  her  in  1833,  succeeding  Mr. 
Sargent,  who  died  in  the  same  year,  as  rector  of 
Lavington  and  Graffham.  He  was  an  excellent 
parish  priest,  but  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  tabu- 


Results  of  the  Cases  179 

late  with  any  sort  of  accuracy  his  relationship  to 
the  existing  parties  in  the  church.  In  1835  we  find 
him  preaching,  at  the  Archdeacon's  visitation,  in 
Chichester  Cathedral  in  favour  of  the  Apostolical 
Succession.  But  within  a  few  months  he  is  at  a 
meeting  of  the  S.  P.  C.  K.  in  London,  **to  defend", 
he  says,  *^the  Evangelical  cause  against  the  arch- 
bishop" (Dr.  Howley).  In  1838  he  seems  thoroughly 
to  identify  himself  with  the  Oxford  movement  in 
a  sermon  on  **The  Rule  of  Faith",  preached  at 
Bishop  Otter's  primary  visitation.  In  publishing 
this  sermon  he  added  an  appendix  in  which  he 
expressed  the  same  views  yet  more  strongly.  This 
sermon  appears  to  have  broken  his  connection  with 
the  Low  Church  clergy  of  the  diocese,  who  were 
highly  offended  at  it,  and  to  have  thrown  him  for  a 
time  into  the  arms  of  the  Oxford  men.  He  sent  a 
copy  of  the  sermon  to  Newman  and  Keble,  and  was 
invited  by  Newman  to  write  for  The  British  Critic  \ 
which  he  did.  He  also  wrote  against  the  Ecclesias- 
tical Commission  as  an  encroachment  upon  the 
liberty  of  the  church — a  grievance,  indeed,  which 
was  felt  by  others  besides  the  Oxford  men,  though 
it  was  particularly  offensive  to  the  latter.  But  in 
1840  he  became  Archdeacon  of  Chichester,  and  his 
charges  in  that  capacity  were  increasingly  anti- 
Tractarian.  It  seems  to  me,  however,  a  gratui- 
tous assumption  on  the  part  of  his  biographer 
that  the  change  was  due  to  an  unwillingness  to 
be  on   the  unpopular  side;    it   is  more  charitable 


i8o  The  Anglican  Revival. 

and,  as  I  think,  more  reasonable  to  believe  that 
it  was  due  to  the  changed  aspect  of  the  movement 
after  the  publication  of  Tract  90;  many  besides 
Manning  took  a  different  view  after  that  event. 
At  any  rate,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Manning  took 
the  side  of  Newman's  enemies  on  that  memorable 
occasion  in  1841;  and  in  1842  he  repudiated  in 
his  charge  all  connection  with  any  party  in  the 
church.  In  his  charge  of  1843  he  disclaimed,  still 
more  emphatically  and  pointedly,  any  connection 
with  Pusey  or  Newman ;  and  finally,  in  his  charge 
of  1845  he  attacked  the  Church  of  Rome  and  the 
Romanizing  party  in  the  Church  of  England  so 
fiercely  as  to  call  forth  a  remonstrance  from  Dr. 
Pusey. 

Then  came  another  change,  due  probably  to  his 
reading  Newman's  Essay  on  the  Development  of 
Doctriney  which  produced  a  great  effect  upon  his 
mind.  From  1846  onwards  his  letters  to  Robert 
Wilberforce  show  that  he  was  less  and  less  con- 
vinced of  the  validity  of  the  claims  of  the  English 
Church.  The  same  tone  runs  through  his  letters 
to  Dr.  Pusey,  to  whom,  e.g.^  he  wrote  in  1847,  sym- 
pathizing with  him  in  his  trouble  at  Leeds,  and 
adding:  *^The  direct  and  certain  tendency  of  what 
remains  of  the  original  movement  is  to  the  Roman 
Church".  The  Gorham  judgment  broke  the  tie, 
which  had  been  growing  weaker  and  weaker  for 
more  than  four  years,  that  bound  him  to  the  English 
Church,  and  on  April  6,  1851,  he  was  received  into 


Results  of  the  Cases.  i8i 

the  Church  of  Rome.  His  opinions  had  always 
been,  more  or  less,  in  an  unsettled  state.  **  I  was 
a  Pietist",  he  said  in  after  years,  ''until  I  accepted 
the  Tridentine  Decrees";  and  again,  ''  I  had  never 
been  one  of  the  company  of  men  working  in  Ox- 
ford. I  knew  them  all.  I  agreed  in  most  things, 
not  from  contact  with  them,  but  because  at  Laving- 
ton  I  read  by  myself  in  the  same  direction." 

But  if  all  this  be  so — and  it  rests,  as  will  have 
been  perceived,  upon  actual  facts,  and  upon  Man- 
ning's own  words,  not  upon  any  one's  opinion 
about  him — can  it  be  correct  to  represent  Manning 
as  in  any  way  a  leader  of  the  Anglican  movement? 
His  heart  never  was  wholly  in  it,  and  on  occasions 
was  decidedly  against  it. 

Among  others  who  went  over  to  Rome  at  or 
about  the  same  time  were  Mr.  Maskell,  Mr.  Dods- 
worth,  Mr.  Henry  Wilberforce,  Mr.  Allies,  Mr.  Hope 
Scott,  Mr.  Badeley,  and  Archdeacon  Wilberforce. 

These  were  all  men  of  mark  in  their  way.  Mr. 
William  Maskell  had  done  valuable  service  to  the 
church  as  an  ecclesiastical  antiquary,  especially 
by  his  researches  into  the  ancient  liturgies  of  the 
church,  and  by  his  History  of  the  Martin  Marpre- 
late  controversy  in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
He  was  chaplain  to  the  Bp.  of  Exeter  (Phillpotts), 
and  had  conducted  the  examination  of  Mr.  Gorham. 
Mr.  William  Dodsworth  was  a  Cambridge  man, 
and  had  come  over  from  the  Evangelicals  to  the 
Tractarians.     He  was  a  popular  preacher  and  a 


i82  The  Anglican  Revival. 

very  estimable  clergyman  in  London,  where  he 
became  intimately  associated  with  Dr.  Pusey,  who 
established  an  Anglican  Sisterhood  in  his  parish 
(Christ  Church,  S.  Pancras),  and  placed  it  under 
his  direction.  In  consequence  of  the  Gorham  judg- 
ment he  joined  the  Roman  Church  in  January,  1851. 
Mr.  Henry  Wilberforce  was  the  younger  brother  of 
Samuel  Wilberforce.  He  was  a  double  first-class- 
man, and  had  been  for  some  time  vicar  of  East  Far- 
leigh  near  Maidstone.  He  had  been  a  great  friend 
of  Newman  and  all  the  leaders,  and  was  a  man  of  a 
genial  and  original  character.  Mr.  T.  W.  Allies 
was  an  Oxford  first-classman  and  university  prize- 
man. He  was  incumbent  of  the  historical  village 
of  Launton,  in  the  diocese  of  Oxford,  where  he  was 
brought  into  collision  with  his  diocesan  (Bp.  Wil- 
berforce) in  consequence  of  a  Journal  in  France 
which  he  published,  and  which  was  of  a  distinctly 
Roman  tendency.  It  does  not  appear  that  he  was 
driven  to  Rome  by  the  Gorham  judgment.  Indeed, 
he  went  over  a  little  before  the  final  judgment  in 
that  case  was  given,  resigning  his  living  on  Sept.  3, 
1849,  and  being  admitted  into  the  Roman  Church 
shortly  afterwards;  but  he  belongs  to  the  same 
group  of  seceders.  Mr.  J.  R.  Hope  Scott  (he 
added  the  name  of  Scott  in  later  life)  was  an 
Oxford  friend  of  Mr.  Gladstone,  Lord  Selborne, 
Manning,  and  Newman,  and  was  the  confiden- 
tial adviser  of  the  last-named  in  after  years.  He 
was  a  Fellow  of  Merton,  and  became  a   famous 


Results  of  the  Cases.  183 

parliamentary  barrister.  There  is  an  adventitious 
interest  about  him,  as  having  become,  through  his 
wife,  the  possessor  of  Abbotsford.  He  was  received 
into  the  Roman  Church  at  the  same  time  as  his 
friend  Manning,  April  6,  185 1.  Mr.  E.  L.  Badeley 
was  his  intimate  friend,  and  was  also  an  ecclesias- 
tical lawyer  of  note,  whose  legal  services  were  fre- 
quently engaged  by  the  church  party;  indeed  it  was 
he  who  had  argued  the  Bishop  of  Exeter's  case 
against  Mr.  Gorham  before  the  Judicial  Committee. 
He  and  Manning  were  among  fourteen  members  of 
the  meeting  who,  in  the  summer  of  1850,  signed  nine 
resolutions,  the  gist  of  which  was  that  the  views  of 
the  Privy  Council  on  Baptism  should  be  solemnly 
disavowed  by  the  English  Church;  and  when  no 
such  action  was  taken,  he  went  over  to  Rome. 

The  last  secession  to  be  noted  was  perhaps  the 
most  grievous  of  all.  Of  the  four  celebrated  brothers 
Wilberforce,  none  was  so  learned,  so  saintly,  so 
eminently  lovable  in  every  respect  as  Robert  Isaac. 
He  was  a  double  first-classman,  a  Fellow  and 
most  able  and  effective  Tutor  of  Oriel,  an  excel- 
lent parish  priest,  and  a  powerful  and  attractive 
writer.  Among  the  correspondents  of  the  great 
bishop  there  is  not  one  to  whom  his  whole  heart 
was  so  evidently  given  as  his  brother  Robert  Isaac. 
Like  many  very  learned  men  he  was  diffident  of 
himself,  but  he  was  candid  and  open  as  the  day- 
light; he  was  indeed  an  honour  to  any  religious 
communion  to  which  he  belonged;  and  he  all  but 


184  The  Anglican  Revival. 

died  as  he  had  lived  in  the  church  of  his  baptism. 
But  the  Hampden  and  the  Gorham  cases  shook 
him;  and  he  finally  succumbed  to  the  incessant 
arguments  and  importunities  of  his  brother  Henry 
and  his  connection,  Manning — though  he  was  quite 
the  equal  of  both  in  point  of  real  learning  and  abili- 
ties— and  joined  the  Church  of  Rome  in  1854,  dying 
a  few  weeks  afterwards. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  these,  to  which  others 
might  be  added,  were  serious  secessions — perhaps 
even  more  serious  than  those  which  had  taken  place 
in  1845-6,  excepting  of  course  the  great  secession 
of  all.  But  the  party  was  far  better  able  to  bear 
them;  for  in  spite  of  appearances  to  the  contrary,  it 
was  in  reality  stronger  in  1851  than  it  had  been  in 
1846;  and  when  we  compare  the  handful  that  were 
taken  away  with  the  vast  numbers  who  remained, 
the  loss  will  appear  a  trifling  one. 

Immediate  steps  were  taken  (i)  to  vindicate  the 
church  from  complicity  in  the  Gorham  judgment, 
and  (2)  to  encourage  friends  and  prevent  them  from 
seceding  to  Rome.  Church  unions  were  formed  in 
all  parts  of  the  country,  and  monster  meetings  were 
held  in  London,  at  one  of  which,  held  in  the  Free- 
masons' Hall  in  July,  1850,  both  Keble  and  Pusey 
uttered  some  weighty  words.  Keble,  sounding  his 
characteristic  note  of  **  patience",  made  a  telling 
point  by  reminding  the  meeting  that  **the  early 
church  had  been  content  to  wait  fifty-six  years" — that 
is,  from  the  Council  of  Nice  in  325  a.d.  to  the  Coun- 


Results  of  the  Cases.  185 

cil  of  Constantinople  in  381 — "for  rest  from  troubles 
on  a  chief  point  of  doctrine",  while  "we",  he  adds, 
**are  now  in  1850,  and  some  eager  ones  think  it 
much  too  long  to  wait  for  1851  or  1852  for  settle- 
ment of  our  present  trouble".  Then  rising  to  an 
unwonted  strain  of  eloquence,  "The  whole  air",  he 
said,  "of  England  seems  to  me  to  ring  with  voices 
from  the  dead  and  from  the  living,  especially  from 
the  holy  dead,  all  to  this  effect:  *  Stay  here ;  think 
not  of  departing;  do  here  your  work'".  Pusey 
recommended  a  bold  front:  "We  stand  where  two 
roads  part — the  way  of  the  world  and  the  way  of 
the  church;  the  way  of  man  and  the  way  of  God.  .  . 
If  the  state  will  not,  as  Magna  Charta  pledges  it, 
allow  that  the  church  should  have  her  liberties 
inviolate,  we  must  ask  that  the  state  will  set  us  free 
from  itself,  and  go  forth,  as  Abraham,  not  knowing 
whither  he  went,  poor  as  to  this  world's  goods,  but 
rich  with  the  blessing  of  that  seed  in  whom  all 
nations  of  the  earth  shall  be  blessed."  At  the  same 
time  he  was  far  too  well-read  a  man  to  agree  with 
the  extravagant  theories  which,  in  the  recoil  from 
the  judgment  of  a  lay  court,  some  put  forth  on  the 
church's  entire  independence  of  the  state.  To  cor- 
rect these  he  published  his  valuable  fragment  on 
The  Royal  Supremacy  (1850),  in  which  he  showed 
that  the  early  church  did  not  deny  to  the  state  all 
control  over  church  matters,  due  safeguards  being 
provided.  R.  W.  Church  also  wrote  a  valuable 
article  in  The  Christian  Remembrancer  on  the  same 


i86  The  Anglican  Revival. 

subject.  At  another  meeting  of  the  London  Church 
Union  at  St.  Martin's  Hall,  October,  1850,  Pusey, 
referring,  as  he  rarely  did,  to  the  now  reiterated 
charge  of  Romanizing  brought  against  himself  and 
his  friends,  said:  **  If  the  labours  of  17  or  27  years 
will  not  persuade  men  that  we  are  faithful  to  the 
Church  of  England,  words  will  not.  We  must 
await  God's  time,  until  this  fever  of  fear  subside;  or 
if  nothing  will  convince  them,  death  in  the  bosom 
of  the  church  will."  Experience  proved  the  truth 
of  this  utterance;  after  the  secession  of  Robert  Wil- 
berforce,  it  is  astonishing  how  few  men  of  mark 
dreamed  of  leaving  the  Church  of  England  for 
Rome. 

Meanwhile  the  Roman  Church  itself  was  not  idle. 
It  was  quite  in  accordance  with  the  papal  policy  in 
relation  to  the  English  Church  from  the  earliest 
times,  that  Pope  Pius  IX.  should  choose  this  time 
of  perplexity  as  a  favourable  time  for  pushing  his 
claims.  In  the  autumn  of  1850  England  was  par- 
celled out  into  dioceses,  and  the  bishops  dignified 
with  territorial  titles,  all  under  the  direction  of  the 
astute  Dr.  Wiseman,  who  was  now  raised  to  the 
cardinalate,  and  exchanged  the  shadowy  title  of 
Bishop  of  Melipotamos  in  partibus  for  the  more 
definite  and  impressive  one  of  Archbishop  of  West- 
minster. It  is  said  that  the  bull  for  creating  this 
new  Archbishopric  of  Westminster  had  been  pre- 
pared for  three  years.  Possibly  the  troubles  at 
Rome  and  the  exile  of  the  pope  at  Gaeta  may  have 


Results  of  the  Cases.  187 

delayed  its  publication.  At  any  rate  October,  1850, 
was  a  convenient  season  for  launching  it.  It  was 
just  the  time  when  the  Gorham  case  had  made 
some  people  doubt  whether  the  Church  of  England, 
steeped,  as  they  deemed  it,  in  Erastianism,  was  a 
safe  home  for  them  to  dwell  in ;  while  others  were 
filled  with  the  utmost  alarm  by  the  secessions  to 
Rome  which  it  had  provoked,  and  was  still  provok- 
ing. The  *'  Papal  Aggression  ",  as  it  was  termed, 
fanned  the  alarm  into  a  furious  flame.  Lord  John 
Russell,  the  premier,  encouraged  by  his  recent 
triumph  over  the  High  Churchmen  in  the  Hampden 
case,  rushed,  nothing  loath,  into  the  arena;  wrote 
a  violent  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham  (Dr. 
Maltby),  garnished  with  copious  references  to  **the 
unworthy  sons  of  the  church  ",  *Hhe  mummeries  of 
superstition ",  and  so  forth ;  and  succeeded  in 
getting  a  bill  passed  through  Parliament  in  Febru- 
ary, 185 1,  declaring  the  assumption  of  ecclesiastical 
titles  in  England  by  Roman  Catholic  priests  illegal. 
The  Roman  Catholics  quietly  disregarded  the  law, 
and  went  on  calling  themselves  by  their  new  titles, 
and  the  act  became  a  dead  letter.  The  p^nic  passed 
away,  and  the  movement  in  the  English  Church 
advanced,  still  vehemently  opposed,  but  falsifying 
the  predictions  of  its  many  opponents  that  its  ulti- 
mate goal  was  Rome. 


i88  The  Anglican  Revival. 

Chapter  IX. 
The  Movement  and  Public  Worship. 

Little  or  nothing  has  been  said  in  the  preceding 
chapters  about  that  which,  to  the  outer  eye,  is  the 
most  distinctive  feature  of  the  Anglican  Movement 
— the  wonderful  change  which  it  has  wrought  in 
the  conduct  of  public  worship,  and  in  the  fabrics  in 
which  that  worship  is  conducted.  The  reason  is, 
that  this  feature  did  not  come  prominently  forward 
in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  movement.  At  the  same 
time  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  its  first  leaders 
attached  no  importance  to  externals.  No  one  can 
read  The  Christian  Year,  still  less  The  Lyra  Inno- 
centium,  without  perceiving  that  the  value  of  the 
outward,  not  only  as  expressive  of,  but  as  deeply 
affecting  the  inward,  was  keenly  felt  by  John  Keble; 
as  indeed  he  showed  in  a  practical  form  by  devoting 
all  the  profits  of  The  Christian  Year  to  the  restora- 
tion of  Hursley  Church.  Dr.  Pusey  expressly  said 
in  after  years  that  '*they  [the  first  leaders]  were 
very  anxious  about  ritual,  but  that  the  circum- 
stances were  entirely  different  then  from  what  they 
are  now  (1866).  They  shrank  from  caring  for 
externals  at  the  outset  of  their  work,  from  intro- 
ducing ritual  before  doctrine  had  taken  possession 
of  the  hearts  of  their  people.  It  was  like  giving 
children  flowers  that  would  fade,  wither,  and  die 
immediately.     They  had  laboured  rather  to  plant 


The  Movement  and  Public  W^orship.      189 

the  bulbs,  which  in  good  time  would  send  forth 
their  flowers,  flourishing  abundantly."^  These 
words  are  all  the  more  significant  because  Dr.  Pusey 
was  very  far  from  identifying  himself  with  the 
*' ritualists";  and,  in  fact,  on  more  than  one  occa- 
sion expressed  disapproval  of  them.^  Newman, 
indeed,  is  noted  for  having  perpetrated  one  of  the 
most  hideous  ecclesiastical  edifices  in  England;  but 
that  was  in  his  pre-Anglican  days.  When  he 
walked — for  a  time — in  the  Via  Media,  he  fully 
recognized  the  importance  of  ritual,  showing  this 
in  a  practical  way  in  connection  with  his  new 
church  at  Littlemore.  It  is  curious  to  observe  the 
mixed  feeling  of  admiration,  surprise,  and  a  little 
alarm,  with  which  his  closest  friend  describes  the 
church  as  it  appeared  on  the  day  of  consecration. 
**  Newman's  church,"  writes  Lord  Blachford  to  his 
sister,  Sept.  4,  1836,  **now  finished,  is  certainly 
one  of  the  most  perfect  things  for  its  size  I  ever 
saw.  The  altar  is  beautiful,  and  the  rest  is  so  well 
kept  under,  that  when  you  come  in  you  seem  to  see 
nothing  but  the  altar;  never,  certainly,  was  any- 
thing so  unlike  modern  churches.  The  builders, 
&c.,  are  extremely  puzzled  at  the  capricious  and 
unseemly  (as  to  them  appears)  way  in  which  his 
ornament  is  spent:  no  cushions  in  the  arm-chairs 
by  the  side  of  the  altar,  mere  rush  hassocks  for  the 

» Dr.  Pusey's  speech  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  English  Church  Union 
In  1866,  quoted  by  Mr.  Hore  in  The  Church  in  England  from  William 
ill.  to  Victoria,  ii.  323. 

•  See  Life  of  Pusey,  vol.  iv.  pp.  aix-9,  a7X-3,  977. 


igo  The  Anglican  Revival. 

priest  to  kneel  on  there ;  no  cushion  to  support  the 
prayer-book  on  the  altar;  no  cushions  or  hangings 
on  the  pulpit  at  all\  and  instead  of  a  reading-desk, 
the  kind  of  stand  that  a  person  plays  the  violin 
before,  with  a  bran  hassock  to  kneel  on  when  neces- 
sary; while  the  altar  itself  was  carved  stone,  with 
seven  pretty  Early  English  arches  behind  it."  He 
adds  that  they  were  all  afraid  what  the  Bishop 
[Bagot],  who  came  to  consecrate  it,  would  say,  but 
that  he  was  very  kind  and  complimentary.^  It  was 
the  same  with  Isaac  Williams,  who  published,  in 
the  early  part  of  1838,  The  Cathedral^  or  The  Catho- 
lick  and  Apostolick  Church  in  England.  This 
poem  was  written  about  the  same  time  as  his  first 
Tract  on  Reserve^  and  **in  pursuance  of  the  same 
great  object  we  had  undertaken  "  [in  the  Tracts] ; 
and  his  mode  of  aiding  that  object  was  by  con- 
necting each  part  of  the  edifice  with  some  por- 
tion of  church  doctrine  or  discipline.  And  in  his 
subsequent  volume.  The  Baptistery  (1842),  the  lead- 
ing idea  is  that  earthly  things  were  a  shadow  of 
heavenly. 

Indeed,  the  fact  that  one  of  the  chief  features  of 
the  movement  was  the  greater  prominence  it  gave 
to  the  objective  side  of  religion,  as  a  complement 
to  the  subjectivity  of  Evangelicalism,  is  of  itself 
enough  to  show  that  it  could  never  have  regarded 
the  externals  of  worship  as  a  matter  of  slight 
moment.     It  was  of  its  essence  to  teach  the  dignity 

» Letters  of  Lord  Blackford,  p.  38. 


The  Movement  and  Public  ^Vorship.      191 

and  importance  of  the  sacraments;  and  a  necessary 
corollary  to  such  teaching  was  that  the  adjuncts  of 
worship  were  of  real  account.  Accordingly,  we  find 
that  as  soon  as  these  principles  began  to  take  root 
and  to  spread  in  all  directions,  attention  was  at 
once  paid  to  the  subject. 

In  1838  the  Oxford  Architectural  Society  was 
founded,  with  Mr.  J.  H.  Parker,  an  enthusiast  on 
the  subject  of  Gothic  architecture,  for  its  first  secre- 
tary. In  1839  the  Cambridge  Camden  Society 
arose,  Mr.  Benjamin  Webb,  Mr.  E.  J.  Boyce,  and 
Mr.  J.  M.  Neale  being  its  chief  founders.  The 
object  of  the  society,  which  in  1846  was  removed 
to  London,  and  changed  its  name  to  *'The  Ecclesio- 
logical  Society",  was  "the  promotion  of  the  study 
of  Christian  Art  and  Antiquities,  more  especially 
in  whatever  relates  to  the  architecture,  arrangement, 
and  decoration  of  churches".  Nothing  blocked 
the  way  towards  the  attainment  of  this  object  more 
effectually  than  the  pew  system,  which  was  then 
almost  universal.  Accordingly,  the  society  waged 
internecine  war  against  this  system,  chiefly  through 
its  organ.  The  Ecclesiologist.  Mr.  Neale  wrote  A 
History  of  Pews,  A  Few  Words  to  Church  Builders y 
A  Few  Words  to  Churchwardens  on  Churches  and 
Church  Ornaments ;  and  the  advocacy  of  open  seats 
in  church  became  part  of  the  work  of  the  movement. 
The  example  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge  was  fol- 
lowed in  other  districts,  and  **  Architectural "  or 
*•  Archaeological "  Societies  were  established  with, 


192  The  Anglican  Revival. 

more  or  less,  the  same  object.  The  crusade  against 
pews  met  with  great  opposition,  being  termed  "  The 
Tractarian  Anti-Pew  Mania";  but  it  is  needless  to 
say  that  it  was  in  the  end  successful.  So  also  were 
the  efforts  to  present  more  fully  the  church's  sys- 
tem, with  its  daily  round  from  Advent  to  Advent; 
to  restore  and  beautify  the  church  fabrics,  and 
generally  to  make  public  worship  externally  more 
worthy  of  its  high  purpose.  So  also  were  the 
efforts  to  improve  our  psalmody,  which  had  long 
been  one  of  the  weakest  points  in  our  public  ser- 
vices. In  1841  the  Motett  Society  was  founded  for 
the  purpose  of  reviving  *  *  the  study  and  practice  of 
the  choral  service  of  the  Church  ".^  Men  like  Sir 
F.  A.  G.  Ouseley  (who  was  for  some  time  curate  at 
one  of  the  most  advanced  churches,  S.  Barnabas, 
Pimlico)  and  Dr.  W.  H.  Monk  (who  was  organist 
at  another,  S.  Matthias,  Stoke-Newington)  did  a 
world  of  good  in  this  direction.  The  Ecclesio- 
logical  Society  also  took  up  the  matter  warmly. 

How  sorely  needed  such  efforts  were  is  testified 
by  one  of  the  few  survivors  who  still  remember  what 
pubHc  worship  was  before  the  revival.  *'It  must 
be  admitted",  writes  Mr.  Gladstone,  *'that  the  state 
of  things  from  which  the  thing  popularly  known  as 
Ritualism  took  historically  its  point  of  departure, 
was  dishonouring  to  Christianity,  disgraceful  to  the 
nation,  disgraceful  most  of  all  to  that  much-vaunted 

1  See  Mr.  Here's  The  Church  in  England  from  William  III.  to  Victoria, 
ii.  324. 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      193 

religious  sentiment  of  the  English  public  which  in 
impenetrable  somnolence  endured  it,  and  resented 
aU  interference  with  it.  .  .  .  The  actual  state  of 
things  was  bad  beyond  all  parallel  known  to  me  in 
experience  or  reading.  Taking  together  the  ex- 
pulsion of  the  poor  and  labouring  classes  (especially 
from  the  town  churches),  the  mutilations  and  block- 
ages of  the  fabrics,  the  baldness  of  the  service,  the 
elaborate  horrors  of  the  so-called  music,  with  the 
jargon  of  parts  contrived  to  exhibit  the  powers  of 
every  village  roarer,  and  to  prevent  all  congrega- 
tional singing;  and,  above  all,  the  coldness  and 
indifference  of  the  lounging  or  sleeping  congre- 
gations, our  services  were  probably  without  a 
parallel  in  the  world  for  their  debasement."^ 

This  general  testimony  is  borne  out  in  detail  by 
another  distinguished  layman,  a  disciple  of  the 
Oxford  school,^  who  himself  took  no  small  part  in 
bringing  about  a  change  for  the  better  in  church 
worship  and  church  fabrics.  **  In  the  reign  of 
George  IV.",  writes  Mr.  A.  J.  Beresford  Hope, 
"worship  in  the  Church  of  England  in  an  opulent 
and  beautiful  town  in  Surrey  " — that  is,  of  course, 
Dorking — **was  made  palpable  to  my  childish 
senses.     The  building  was  a  large,  and  had  been  a 

1" Ritualism  and  Ritual",  published  first  in  The  Contemporary  Review 
for  October,  1874,  and  afterwards  republished  in  the  Gleanings. 

»  This  is  Mr.  Hope's  own  description  of  himself  though  he  was  a  Cam- 
bridge man:  "For  the  formation  of  my  views  upon  Christian  antiquity  and 
upon  the  Church  of  England  I  am  mainly  indebted  to  that  school  of  writers 
whose  public  notoriety  dates  from  the  commencement  of  the  Tracts  for  the 
Times  in  x^yi." —Worship  in  the  Church  of  England,  ch.  L,  p.  4. 
(11426)  N 


194  The  Anglican  Revival. 

handsome  Gothic  church,  but  of  its  interior  the 
general  parish  saw  very  little  except  the  nave  and 
aisles,  for  the  chancel  was  cut  off  by  a  perfectly  solid 
partition,  covered  with  the  usual  sacred  writings  and 
some  strange  painting,  among  which  Moses  and 
Aaron  shone  in  peculiar  uncouthness.  The  aisles 
were  utilized  for  certain  family  pews  or  private  boxes, 
raised  aloft  and  approached  by  private  doors  and 
staircases.  There  was  a  decrepit  western  gallery 
for  the  band,  and  the  ground  floor  was  crammed 
with  cranky  pews  of  every  shape."  After  having 
spoken  of  the  **  communion  office  being  read  at  the 
desk"  and  other  strange  uses,  he  adds,  *'  It  was  not 
so  very  backward  a  parish ;  it  possessed  one  of  the 
earliest  national  schools".^ 

In  a  letter  to  the  present  writer,  dated  November, 
1886,  the  same  gentleman  dwells  upon  the  reform 
in  the  matter  of  public  worship  in  a  very  important 
sphere,  that  of  one  of  our  largest  public  schools, 
commenced  fifty  years  before  by  one  who  has  been 
already  noticed  as  a  weighty  factor  in  the  Anglican 
Revival,  though  not,  strictly  speaking,  a  Tractarian. 
** Among  the  benefits",  he  writes,  ''bestowed  by 
Dr.  Wordsworth  on  the  school  [Harrow],  foremost 
comes  the  building  of  the  school  chapel ;  with  this 
work  old  order  ceased,  and  Harrow  school  took 
its  place  in  the  general  revival  of  church  interests. 
Words  cannot  describe  the  dreariness  of  the  wor- 
ship offered  to  us  in  my  days.     One  rustic,  battered 

»  Worship  in  the  Church  of  England,  i.  8. 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      195 

gallery  filled  up  the  west  end  of  the  nave  of  Harrow 
Parish  Church,  and  served  for  the  Upper  boys; 
another  stifling  and  cavernous  gallery  was  hitched 
into  the  north  aisle  for  the  Lower  boys.  The  wor- 
ship took  no  account  of  the  needs  and  peculiarities 
of  school-boys,  but  was  merely  the  parish  worship, 
of  which  they  were  casual  spectators.  .  .  .  With  a 
school  chapel  built  by  Dr.  Wordsworth,  all  was 
changed.  The  original  building,  due  to  Mr.  Cock- 
erell,  had  not  much  to  say  for  itself  architecturally, 
but  the  spirit  of  the  thing  was  there — it  was  the 
place  of  worship  of  the  school,  and  meant  for  the 
wants  of  the  school ;  bit  by  bit  it  has  been  replaced 
by  the  present  beautiful  chapel,  but  as  the  dawn  of 
good  things,  Dr.  Wordsworth's  chapel  should  be 
held  in  everlasting  remembrance."^ 

These  are  reminiscences  of  men  who  had  lived  on 
to  see  better  things.  But  the  contemporary  evidence 
of  the  low  estate  to  which  the  externals  of  worship 
had  fallen  is,  in  one  sense,  more  valuable,  because 
the  writers  would  hardly  have  had  the  audacity  to 
give  it,  if  anyone  who  had  eyes  and  ears  could  have 
contradicted  it  if  it  had  been  false ;  for  it  was  not  a 
matter  of  opinion  but  of  seeing  and  hearing.  A 
few  extracts,  therefore,  from  the  wealth  of  evidence 
which  is  available,  may  be  given. 

What,  then,  do  contemporaries  tell  us  about  the 
state  of  our  country  churches  before  the  revival? 
**Let  any  one",  says  a  writer  in  the  British  Critic^ 

» Quoted  in  Life  of  Bishop  Christopher  Wordsworth,  ch.  iv. 


196  The  Anglican  Revival. 

in  1827,  **  make  a  circuit  of  the  villages  throughout 
a  considerable  portion  of  these  realms,  and  what 
is  the  spectacle  which  in  too  many  instances  will 
salute  his  eyes  on  entering  the  church-yard?  On 
looking  at  the  exterior  of  the  church,  he  will  often 
find  it  half  buried  beneath  the  mould,  which  has 
been  suffered  to  accumulate  round  it  for  ages,  and 
to  spread  a  gradual  decay  throughout  the  walls 
and  foundations.  On  entering  it,  he  will  find 
that  everything  answers  faithfully  to  the  promise 
without;  and  that  the  external  provision  for  per- 
petuating dampness  and  discomfort  within  has  suc- 
ceeded to  admiration.  The  walls  will  appear  deco- 
rated with  hangings  of  green;  a  carpeting  of  the 
same  pattern  often  partially  covers  the  floor;  and 
the  very  first  and  last  thoughts  which  are  excited  by 
the  whole  appearance  of  the  building  are  those  of 
ague,  catarrh,  and  rheumatism."  Thirteen  years 
later  (1841),  a  writer  in  The  Christian  Remembrancer 
declares  that  '*the  traveller  through  these  islands, 
whose  lot  it  was  to  have  before  his  eyes  the  evidence 
of  the  gradual  substitution  of  Christianity  in  the 
place  of  Druidical  superstition,  or  Roman,  Saxon, 
or  Danish  idolatry,  could  hardly,  perhaps,  have 
found  among  the  decaying  fanesof  Jupiter  or  Woden, 
scenes  of  more  dismal  ruin  and  dank  desolation  than 
are  to  be  seen  at  the  present  moment  in  some  of  the 
houses  of  God  in  our  rural  districts;  and  the  reason 
why  so  little  is  said  about  it  s6ems  to  be  that  we  are 
so  accustomed  to  see  our  churches  generally  in  a 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      197 

dilapidated  condition,  that  we  have  altogether 
ceased  to  find  anything  remarkable  in  it ".  And  then 
he  gives  painful  details.  It  may  be  objected  that 
writers  in  TJie  British  Critic  and  The  Christian  Re- 
membrancer are  prejudiced  witnesses,  as  belonging 
to  the  party  which  set  itself  to  correct  the  abuses 
they  complained  of;  but  would  they  have  dared 
to  make  such  assertions  if  they  could  have  been 
proved  false  by  anyone  who  chose  to  use  his  eye- 
sight? 

The  worship  within  was  too  often  of  a  piece  with 
the  external  surroundings.  Let  us  take,  as  an 
example,  the  psalmody.  Too  often  an  ill-educated 
parish  clerk  was  left  to  make  his  own  selection  out 
of  the  meagre  stores  of  Tate  and  Brady.  The 
Evangelicals,  indeed,  had  introduced  hymns,  and 
in  this,  as  in  other  respects,  the  worship  in  Evan- 
gelical churches  was  generally  in  advance  of  all 
except  those  which  belonged  to  *Uhe  Clapton",  as 
distinguished  from  **the  Clapham  sect".  But,  as 
a  rule,  hymns  were  regarded  as  Methodistical,  and 
church  people  preferred  psalms  out  of  which  the 
poetry  had  been  carefully  extracted  by  the  com- 
pilers of  the  Old  Version  or  the  New.  The  music 
was  of  a  piece  with  the  words.  According  to  the 
same  writer  in  the  British  Critic  already  quoted, 
even  **some  of  the  London  churches,  with  all  the 
facilities  for  excellent  psalmody,  contrived  to  con- 
vert this  joyous  spiritual  exercise  into  a  positive 
infliction".     In  the  country  (with  honourable  ex- 


igS  The  Anglican  Revival. 

ceptions)  it  was  either  a  worse  infliction,  or  ignored 
altogether.  One  can  hardly  imagine  an  archdeacon, 
in  his  charge,  making  a  false  assertion  on  a  plain 
matter  of  fact ;  and  this  is  what  Archdeacon  Bailey 
says  to  the  clergy  of  the  Archdeaconry  of  Stow  in 
1826:  **  Sacred  music  is  an  essential  part  of  the 
Liturgy;  it  is  the  very  life  and  soul  of  every  new 
method  of  Dissenting  worship.  Why,  then,  is  it  so 
rarely  invited  to  impart  a  solemn  interest  to  our 
parochial  services?" — with  much  more  to  the  same 
effect.  So  too  a  clergyman  writes  in  the  British 
Magazine  in  1832:  **I  believe  it  to  be  a  matter  oi 
regret  general  among  my  clerical  brethren,  that 
while  almost  every  Dissenting  congregation  culti- 
vates sacred  music  as  a  part  of  their  public  worship, 
it  is  altogether  neglected  in  so  many  of  our  country 
churches  ",  Perhaps  it  was  better  that  it  should  be 
altogether  neglected  than  that  it  should  be  treated, 
as  we  learn  from  no  less  an  authority  than  Bishop 
Mant  that  it  was  treated  by  some.  In  his  notes  *'on 
Psalmody  "  in  his  annotated  edition  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  published  in  1824,  he  finds  it 
necessary  to  give  this  gentle  admonition:  **If  we 
will  not  employ  our  lips  in  the  service,  we  may  still 
fix  our  minds  upon  it;  at  least,  we  should  not  hinder 
others  from  doing  either.  And  particularly,  we 
should  abstain  from  giving  the  bad  example  and 
the  offence  of  indecently  holding  conversation  at 
that  time,  for  which  there  -cannot  surely  be  so 
pressing  an  occasion  but  that  it  may  be  very  safely 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      199 

deferred  till  after  church,  if  not  altogether  omitted." 
Then  he  suggests, — but  evidently  as  a  counsel  of 
perfection,  which  he  did  not  expect  to  be  generally 
carried  out, — that  it  would  be  well  to  stand  up  dur- 
ing the  singing  of  the  Psalms.  **Were  it  more 
uncommon  than  it  is,  it  would  be  far  from  a  dis- 
honourable singularity.  But  still,  as  very  many  in 
most  congregations  have  by  long  habit  been  pre- 
judiced in  favour  of  sitting;  or,  though  they  dis- 
approve the  custom,  feel  a  difficulty  of  quitting  it 
unless  everyone  did,  they  should  not  be  censured 
for  a  practice  by  which  they  mean  nothing  amiss, 
but  kindly  encouraged  to  an  alteration  in  this  point, 
which  we  may  thus  hope  will  gradually  become 
general."  It  would  be  easy,  but  needless,  to  adduce 
other  instances  of  the  laxity  into  which  the  church 
had  fallen  in  regard  to  her  fabrics  and  the  worship 
within  them;  and  few,  I  presume,  would  deny  that 
the  marvellous  improvement  which  has  taken  place 
is  due  mainly  to  the  movement  which  commenced 
in  1833. 

While  this  care  for  public  worship  derived  its 
impulse  from  the  movement,  it  also  reacted  upon 
that  movement  itself,  and  greatly  conduced  to  its 
strength  and  extension.  The  fashion  of  restoring 
and  beautifying  churches  was  taken  up  by  church- 
men of  all  schools,  and  had  a  natural  tendency  to 
draw  men  upward,  so  to  speak.  It  would  be  inter- 
esting to  trace  out  the  numerous  instances  in  which 
the  restored  church  has  helped  to  change  a  more  or 


200  The  Anglican  Revival. 

less  Low  Church  congregation  into  a  more  or  less 
High  one.  People  cannot  help  being  affected  by 
their  outward  surroundings;  and  when  they  wor- 
shipped in  a  building,  every  arrangement  of  which 
would  be  suggestive  of  a  certain  system,  they  were 
apt,  by  little  and  little,  and  often  quite  unconsciously, 
to  advance  in  the  direction  of  that  system.  It  is 
perfectly  marvellous  to  observe  how  things  are  now 
accepted  which  once  provoked  suspicion  and  even 
actual  rebellion.  It  is  difficult  in  the  present  day 
to  realize  that  fifty  years  ago  the  wearing  of  the 
surplice  in  the  pulpit  was  so  exasperating  a  pro- 
ceeding as  to  raise  serious  riots;  it  is  still  more 
difficult  to  realize  that  one  of  the  best  of  our  bishops 
(Dr.  Blomfield),  whose  very  natural  injunctions  to 
his  clergy  to  obey  the  rubric  led  them  to  don — or 
rather,  not  to  put  off — the  obnoxious  garment,  should 
have  been  so  alarmed  at  the  opposition  as  to  retract 
his  previous  orders ;  that  his  successor  should  have 
been  so  annoyed  at  the  sight  of  coloured  stoles  as 
to  utter  his  memorable  command,  **Take  away 
those  ribands";  that  another  bishop  should  have 
inhibited  an  earnest  and  devoted  clergyman  from 
officiating  in  his  diocese,  because  he  put  into  his 
church  ornaments,  most  of  which  are  now  really 
the  rule  rather  than  the  exception,  but  which  the 
bishop  termed  ''frippery"  and  ''spiritual  haber- 
dashery";^ that  an  intelligent  layman  should  have 
complained  to  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  about  "rib- 

iSee  Memoir  of  John  Mason  Neale  (Littledale). 


The  Movement  and  Public  ^Vo^ship.        201 

bons  in  service-books  with  small  cardboard  crosses", 
and  "wreaths  on  a  chancel  arch  and  round  church 
columns";^  that  the  introduction  of  a  choral  service 
at  St.  George's-in-the-East  should  have  raised  a 
mob.  But  all  these  things  really  happened,  and, 
with  the  exception  of  the  last,  arose  from  truly  con- 
scientious feelings.  This,  however,  can  scarcely  be 
said  of  the  disgraceful  riots  at  St.  George's-in-the- 
East  in  1859.  Mr.  Bryan  King,  the  vicar,  had  been 
working  there  for  eight  years,  most  earnestly, 
though  not  perhaps  always  most  judiciously;  and 
with  the  invaluable  aid  of  two  mission  priests,  Mr. 
C.  F.  Lowder  and  Mr.  A.  H.  Mackonochie,  had 
gradually  elevated  the  tone  of  his  poor  parishioners. 
This,  of  course,  had  injured  the  profits  of  those  who 
pandered  to  their  vices,  and  stirred  up  animosity. 
Right-minded  men  could  never  sympathize  with 
opposition  based  on  such  grounds,  and,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  men  who  had  no  sympathy  whatever  with 
the  views  of  the  workers,  men  like  Dean  Stanley 
and  Judge  Hughes,  came  to  the  rescue.  But  this 
is  anticipating.     We  must  go  back  twenty  years. 

One  of  the  first  definite  attempts  to  apply  the 
principles  of  the  church  movement  to  the  accessories 
of  public  worship  was  made  by  Mr.  F.  Oakeley  in 
what  was  then  called  Margaret  Chapel,  on  the  site 
of  which  the  beautiful  church  of  All  Saints',  Mar- 
garet Street,  was  afterwards  built  at  the  sole  expense 
of  Mr.  A.  J.  Beresford  Hope.     In  the  summer  of 

»See  Life  of  Bishop  Samuel  Wilberforce  (Ashwell),  i.  433. 


202  The  Anglican  Revival. 

1839  Mr.  Oakeley  accepted  the  incumbency  of  this 
chapel,  ** desiring  an  opportunity  of  trying  the  effect 
of  Tractarian  principles  upon  a  practical  scale  ".^ 
Margaret  Chapel  seemed  a  most  unpromising  sphere 
for  the  experiment,  for  it  was  ^'a  paragon  of  ugli- 
ness". But  perhaps  he  was  helped  by  the  fact  that 
a  sense  of  reverence  was  traditional  there.  Here 
again  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Gladstone  comes  in. 
**  Reverence",  he  writes  in  1874,  **need  not  be  the 
property  or  characteristic  of  any  school  in  particular. 
It  distinguished  the  Margaret  Chapel  of  forty  years 
ago,  when  the  pastors  of  that  church  were  termed 
Evangelical.  It  subsisted  in  that  same  chapel 
thirty  years  ago,  when  Mr.  Oakeley  (now,  alas! 
ours  no  more)  and  Mr.  Upton  Richards  gave  to  its 
very  simple  services,  which  would  now  scarcely 
satisfy  an  average  congregation,  and  when  the 
fabric  was  little  less  than  hideous,  that  true  solem- 
nity which  is  in  perfect  concord  with  simplicity. 
The  Papal  Church  now  enjoys  the  advantages  of 
the  labours  of  Mr.  Oakeley;  who  united  to  a  fine 
musical  taste  a  much  finer  and  much  rarer  gift,  in 
discerning  and  expressing  the  harmony  between  the 
inward  purposes  of  Christian  worship  and  its  out- 
ward investiture,  and  who  then  had  gathered  round 
him  a  congregation  the  most  devout  and  hearty  that 
I  (for  one)  have  ever  seen  in  any  communion  of  the 
Christian  world.  "2 

» Historical  Notes  of  the  Tractarian  Movement,  by  F.  Oakeley,  p.  6i. 
'-'  Ritualists  and  Ritual. 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.        203 

We  have  here  a  remarkable  illustration  of  what  has 
been  said  above  about  the  general  raising  of  the  tone 
of  congregations.^  Mr.  Gladstone  tells  us  that  '*the 
simple  services"  at  Margaret  Chapel  under  Mr. 
Oakeley  **  would  now  scarcely  satisfy  an  average 
congregation",  and  yet  it  is  clear  that  Mr.  Oakeley 
found  considerable  difficulty  in  establishing  even 
these  simple  services.  There  was  a  recalcitrant  old 
parish  clerk  who  could  not  be  got  rid  of.  The  intro- 
duction of  alms-bags  was  regarded  as  ''a  perilous 
novelty".  They  might  have,  Mr.  Oakeley  tells  us, 
candles  provided  they  did  not  light  them.  They 
were  restricted  to  one  bouquet  of  flowers  on  the 
communion-table,  and  were  required  to  take  especial 
care  that  white  did  not  predominate  on  the  feast  of 
a  virgin,  nor  red  on  that  of  a  martyr.  They  might 
preach  in  a  surplice  in  the  morning  if  they  would 
wear  a  black  gown  in  the  evening, — and  so  forth. ^ 
It  did  not,  of  course,  help  the  work  that  Mr.  Oakeley 
followed  his  friend  Newman  to  Rome,  but  his  col- 
league Mr.  W.  Upton  Richards  remained  to  the 
end  of  his  life  a  loyal  son  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  became  the  much-esteemed  vicar  of  Margaret 
Chapel's  glorious  successor. 

The  doings,  however,  at  Margaret  Chapel  did  not 
create  any  great  sensation ;  at  any  rate,  not  nearly  so 
great  as  that  which  arose  about  1850  in  connection 


'  See  supra,  p.  199. 

'See  Oakelejr's  Historical  Notes  o/ths  Tractarian  Movenunt,  pp.  63  and 
69. 


204  The  Anglican  Revival. 

with  the  church  of  S.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  and 
its  daughter  church,  S.  Barnabas',  Pimlico.  The 
incumbent,  the  Rev.  J.  W.  E.  Bennett,  was  an  ex- 
ceedingly able  and  energetic  man,  who,  so  far  from 
having  any  tendency  to  Rome,  wrote  some  Lectures 
on  the  Distinctive  Errors  of  Romanism^  which  con- 
stitute one  of  the  ablest  defences  of  the  Anglican,  in 
contrast  with  the  Roman  position,  which  has  ever 
been  published.  It  was  on  S.  Barnabas'  Day,  1850, 
that  Bishop  Blomfield  consecrated  the  Church  of 
S.  Barnabas  with  what  was  for  those  days  a  high 
ceremonial.  All  passed  off  well  on  the  day,  but 
when  the  services  were  continued  on  the  same  lines 
they  were  interrupted  by  the  hootings  of  the  mob. 
Mr.  Bennett  had  promised  the  bishop  that  he  would 
resign  the  living,  if  it  should  be  thought  to  be  for 
the  good  of  the  church.  The  bishop  now  claimed 
the  fulfilment  of  his  promise,  and  Mr.  Bennett  re- 
tired to  Frome,  where  he  lived  and  worked  for  many 
years,  making  his  parish  a  centre  of  the  Anglican 
movement.  But  the  services  both  at  S.  Paul's  and 
S.  Barnabas'  were  conducted  on  precisely  the  same 
lines  under  his  successor,  Mr.  Liddell.  And  this 
led  to  the  first  of  those  unhappy  Ritual  trials  which 
so  long  disturbed  the  peace  of  the  church. 

Into  the  details  of  these  cases  it  is  not  purposed 
here  to  enter.  It  is  a  subject  which  should  be  treated 
thoroughly  or  not  at  all;  and  though  I  cannot  at 
all  agree  with  the  theory  that  the  Tractarian  move- 
ment was  one    thing,    the    Ritualistic    movement 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      205 

another,  still  the  latter  was  a  new  phase  which  really 
requires  separate  treatment,  or,  at  any  rate,  longer 
treatment  than  the  space  of  this  little  volume  will 
allow.  Neither  do  the  limits  of  the  work  permit  the 
mention  of  other  churches  which  were  in  the  van  of 
the  movement  for  raising  the  ideal  of  public  worship, 
such  as  the  splendid  new  parish  church  at  Leeds, 
built  under  Dr.  Hook,  and  opened  in  1841,  where 
the  beauty  of  the  singing  soon  became  a  proverb; 
or  the  church  of  S.  Thomas*,  Oxford,  or  of  S. 
Mary  Magdalene,  Munster  Square,  or  of  S.  Alban*s, 
Holborn,  or  of  S.  Andrew's,  Well  Street,  or  of  All 
Saints',  Margaret  Street,  or  of  Wantage,  under  Mr. 
(afterwards  Dean)  Butler,  orof  S.  Paul's,  Brighton, 
and  the  other  **  Wagner"  churches  there;  or  the 
costly  church  at  Wilton,  built  by  the  first  Lord 
Herbert  of  Lea,  or  of  Highnam,  built  by  Mr. 
Gambier  Parry,  or  (to  end  with  the  most  important 
of  all)  S.  Paul's  Cathedral,  which  has  been  trans- 
muted from  a  scandal  into  a  glory  of  the  metropolis. 
But  before  concluding,  some  words  must  be  added 
about  the  subject  generally. 

It  was  a  most  unfortunate  coincidence  that  in  the 
very  same  year  in  which  a  movement  was  started, 
having  for  one  of  its  main  objects  the  exaltation  of 
the  church  as  an  independent,  spiritual  society, 
a  change  was  made  in  the  ultimate  court  of  appeal 
in  matters  of  doctrine  and  ritual,  which  caused  many 
churchmen  to  feel  that  the  church  was  regarded  as 
a  mere  appanage  of  the  state. 


2o6  The  Anglican  Revival. 

After  the  break  with  Rome  in  1534,  the  ultimate 
appeal  was  to  the  sovereign.  This  was  no  new 
doctrine;  it  was  simply  the  reassertion  of  the  old 
doctrine  of  the  royal  supremacy.  But  there  was 
always  a  sort  of  tacit  understanding  that  the  sove- 
reign should  refer  spiritual  cases  to  spiritual  persons. 
And  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  sovereign  did  give  his 
or  her  decision  through  a  court  which  might,  and 
generally  did,  to  a  great  extent,  consist  of  spiritual 
persons — the  Court  of  Delegates.  But  in  1832  the 
final  appeal  was  transferred,  simply  by  Act  of 
Parliament  (for  Convocation  then  existed  only  in 
name,  and  therefore  could  not  be  consulted),  from 
the  Court  of  Delegates  to  the  Privy  Council — that  is, 
from  the  king  in  Chancery  to  the  king  in  Council; 
and  then  in  1833,  to  a  section  of  the  Privy  Council, 
called  the  Judicial  Committee.  This  was  done  by 
a  kind  of  accident,  it  being  never  intended  that  such 
ecclesiastical  cases  should  come  before  the  court  as 
did  come  before  it.  In  fact  it  was  a  purely  secular 
court,  founded  by  a  purely  secular  authority.  Pre- 
lates, indeed,  might  attend  in  certain  cases,  but  only 
as  assessors,  not  as  members.  **The  attendant 
bishops",  said  Canon  Liddon,  **  only  decorated  by 
their  presence  a  tribunal  which  was  essentially  civil 
and  lay;  they  lent  to  its  decisions  a  semblance  of 
ecclesiastical  authority,  which  it  could  not  in  fact 
possess,  and  which  was  only  calculated  to  embarrass 
tender  consciences." 

The  case  is  here  put  as  it  appeared  to  a  large 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      207 

and  increasing  number  of  churchmen,  from  the 
time  of  the  Gorham  judgment  pronounced  by  the 
Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council,  onwards. 
And  when  these  churchmen  were  charged  with 
being  law-breakers,  because  they  rebelled  against 
law  so  made,  they  replied  in  effect,  **  What  do  you 
mean  by  law?  The  early  Christians  were  law- 
breakers when  they  refused  to  sprinkle  a  little 
incense  on  the  altars  of  the  heathen  gods.  It 
might  seem  a  mere  trifle ;  it  might  mean  nothing  to 
them\  it  need  not  in  the  least  have  interfered  with 
their  internal  faith  in  the  one  true  God.  But  a 
principle  was  involved;  therefore  they  chose  rather 
to  go  to  the  stake  than  to  comply  with  this  simple 
ceremony.  And  a  principle  is  involved  in  our  case; 
we  are  required  to  render  unto  Caesar  the  things 
that  are  God's." 

But  if  the  clergy  could  not  submit  to  the  ruling 
of  a  secular  court,  might  they  not,  at  any  rate,  have 
submitted  to  the  ruling  of  the  bishops,  their  own 
spiritual  fathers  in  God?  Undoubtedly  they  might, 
and  some  who  refused  to  submit  to  the  one,  did 
submit  to  the  other.  But  they  also  felt  that  they 
had  a  right  to  ask  a  reason  for  the  ruling.  The 
bishops  were  their  spiritual  fathers  \  but  it  is  the 
part  of  a  father  to  guide  and  direct,  not  arbitrarily 
to  command,  a  grown-up,  intelligent  son.  The 
bishop,  they  thought,  ought  to  have  the  law  of  the 
church,  as  well  as  the  law  of  the  state,  at  his  back; 
and  this  is  exactly  what  they  believed  that  he  had 


2o8  The  Anglican  Revival. 

not.  Moreover,  it  could  never  be  forgotten  that,  if 
churchmen  had  been  simply  content  to  follow  the 
lead  of  individual  bishops,  there  would  have  been 
no  movement  at  all.  It  was  just  the  same  with  the 
Church  Revival  of  1833  as  it  was  with  the  Evangelical 
Revival  of  the  preceding  century.  There  was  not 
a  single  bishop  who  favoured  either  revival  until  it 
had  become  a  power  in  the  land.  It  is  instructive 
to  turn  to  the  episcopal  charges,  on  the  one  hand, 
say,  from  1780  to  1800,  and  on  the  other  hand  from 
1835  to  1855.  It  will  be  found  that  charge  after 
charge  is  full  of  warnings  against  the  revival  then 
in  progress,  with,  at  most,  a  word  of  faint  praise 
here  and  there,  of  the  earnest,  though  misguided, 
efforts  of  the  workers.  Perhaps  it  is  the  office  of  a 
bishop  to  guide  and  regulate,  rather  than  to  lead  a 
crusade ;  but  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  leaders 
of  the  van  of  the  movement  in  any  of  its  stages 
would  derive  but  cold  comfort  from  the  study  of  the 
episcopal  attitude  in  the  past. 

All  this  is  apart  from  the  question  of  ritual  itself. 
That  it  is  exceedingly  foolish  in  any  clergyman  to 
start  a  fancy  ritual  of  his  own ;  that  it  is  worse  than 
foolish  to  attempt  to  force  any  strange  ritual  upon 
an  unwilling  congregation  which  is  not  educated 
up  to  it;^  that  it  is  worst  of  all  to  make  ritual  a  means 
of  showing  and  advocating  disloyalty  to  that  church 

1  Dr.  Pusey  thus  describes  a  meeting  in  1867:  "I  had  three-fourths  or 
four-fifths  of  a  meeting  of  the  E.C.U.  against  me  on  a  sentence  of  mine  dis- 
claiming the  forcing  of  ritual  on  an  unwilling  congregation," — and  more  to 
the  same  effect. — Life,  iv.  216. 


The  Movement  and  Public  Worship.      209 

to  which  he  is  bound  by  the  most  solemn  obh'ga- 
tions;  that  it  argues  great  weakness  in  him  to  be 
carried  away,  as  it  is  to  be  feared  some  were,  beyond 
his  own  convictions,  by  a  few  irresponsible  laymen 
— all  this  is  most  fully  admitted.  Ritual  is  not  an 
end  in  itself,  but  only  a  means  to  an  end ;  and  if  the 
end  be  not  an  honest  one,  or  if  the  means  be  not 
desirable  or  judicious,  then  it  is  a  distinct  evil. 

Again,  a  distinction  should  be  drawn  between  the 
introduction  of  a  high  ritual  into  a  new  church  or  a 
district  church,  and  into  the  one  old  parish  church 
of  the  place,  especially  when  that  church  is  practi- 
cally the  sole  available  means  of  grace  for  church- 
men. The  fact  must  always  be  reckoned  with  that 
there  will  generally  be  some,  and  men  who  have  the 
root  of  the  matter  in  them  too,  who  positively  dis- 
like an  ornate  service,  quite  apart  from  its  supposed 
approximation  to  Rome.  Even  if  these  form  but  a 
small  minority  their  feelings  ought  to  be  regarded; 
and  if  they  form  a  majority,  then  the  wise  clergyman 
will  surely  wait  until  he  has  succeeded  in  changing 
the  feeling.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  such  a  course 
has  not  always  been  adopted,  and  the  result  has 
thus  been  a  very  distinct  weakening  of  the  church. 

There  is  another  point  which  requires  handling 
delicately,  but  cannot  be  wholly  ignored.  The 
leaders  of  the  early  movement  were  among  the 
most  cultured  men  of  the  day;  and  it  must  be 
admitted  that,  with  notable  exceptions,  those  who 
were  prominent  in  the  next  phase  of  the  movement 

(M420)  o 


2IO  The  Anglican  Revival. 

were  not  quite  of  the  same  calibre.  A  keen  ob- 
server, who  had  seen  both  generations,  in  alluding 
to  a  certain  ritual  dead-lock,  writes:  *'  I  wish  wise 
men  would  think  it  over  and  give  us  some  guiding 
principles.  At  present  my  prevailing  feeling  is 
that  this  question  should  not  be  settled  in  a  passion 
by  a  set  of  second-rate  people,  who  are  really  fight- 
ing the  battle  of  (as  it  seems  to  me)  their  own  per- 
versities."^ The  writer  of  the  letter  is  Frederick 
Rogers  (Lord  Blachford);  the  recipient.  Dean 
Church.  How  many  have  we  had,  of  the  same 
calibre,  who  have  been  prominent  either  as  ritualists 
or  anti-ritualists?  Men  on  both  sides  seem  to  me 
to  have  had  a  tendency  to  a  disease  which  may 
be  termed  ''ritual  on  the  brain" — especially  when 
that  brain  was  not  a  very  strong  brain. 

The  real  question  at  issue  between  the  most 
thoughtful  on  both  sides  was  not  one  of  ceremonial 
but  of  doctrine.  Ritual  apart  from  its  symbolism  is  a 
thing  of  naught.  It  was  valued  by  the  really  earnest 
men,  not  for  its  intrinsic  beauty,  but  for  what  it 
taught — taught  through  the  eye  rather  than  through 
the  ear,  and  therefore,  on  the  Horatian  principle, 
taught  more  quickly  and  vividly,  and  that  especially 
among  the  poor  and  the  unlearned.  If,  on  the  one 
hand,  it  was  the  masses  who  raised  the  riots  at  S. 
Barnabas',  and  S.  George's-in-the-East,  and  else- 
where, it  was  also  the  masses  who  were  touched  by 
the  gorgeous  services  at  S»  Alban's,  Holborn,  S. 

1  The  Letters  of  Lord  Blachford,  p.  375. 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  211 

Peter's,  London  Docks,  and  other  similar  churches. 
Can  we  wonder  at  it?  Think  of  the  sordid  sur- 
roundings by  which  they  were  depressed  outside 
the  church,  and  what  an  effective  means  of  elevat- 
ing and  impressing  them  the  mere  sight  of  what 
went  on  inside  the  church  must  have  been.  Think 
again  what  a  real  refreshment  to  such  labourers  in 
the  squalid  courts  and  alleys,  as  Mr.  Lowder  and 
Mr.  Mackonochie,  must  the  grandeur  of  God's 
House  have  afforded. 

It  is  one  of  the  happiest  features  of  these  closing 
years  of  the  nineteenth  century  that  there  is  a  better 
chance  than  there  has  been  for  many  a  long  year  of 
peace  within  the  borders  of  the  sanctuary. 


Chapter  X. 
Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement. 

It  remains  to  sum  up  the  chief  causes  of  the  rapid 
spread  and  enduring  success  of  a  movement,  which 
is  described  by  one  who  had  been  a  keen  observer 
of  life  for  fourscore  years  as  **by  far  the  most  re- 
markable phenomenon  he  had  witnessed  through- 
out his  long  career"^;  which,  taking  its  rise  in  a 
learned  university,  soon  extended  to  very  different 
spheres,  alike  to  the  country  villages,  the  market- 

» Thomas  Grenville  (1755-1846).     See  Dean  Burgon's  Lives  of  Twelve 
Good  Men,  "Samuel  Wilberforce",  ii.  i. 


212  The  Anglican  Revival. 

towns,  the  cathedral  cities,  and  the  great  manufac- 
turing centres. 

(i)  The  revived  study  of  church  history  was 
partly  a  result,  but  partly  also  a  very  potent  cause, 
of  the  movement's  success.  More  than  half  a  cen- 
tury has  elapsed  since  H.  H.  Milman  cynically, 
but  with  a  great  amount  of  truth,  declared  that 
those  who  desired  to  know  the  history  of  the  early 
church  must  turn  to  the  pages  of  Gibbon.  But 
such  a  remark  could  hardly  have  been  made  twenty- 
five  years  later.  A  subject  so  interesting  to  all 
Christians  had  begun  to  be  more  deeply  studied  in 
the  interval ;  and  the  more  closely  it  was  studied, 
the  better  it  was  for  the  Anglican  movement,  which 
was  essentially  a  revival  of  historical  Christianity. 
The  study  taught  men  to  realize  the  continuity  of 
the  English  Church,  and  scattered  to  the  winds  the 
theory  that  a  new  Parliamentary  church  was  in- 
vented in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.;  it  taught  them 
to  discriminate  between  what  was  merely  mediaeval 
and  what  was  primitive;  and  thus  it  removed  the 
difficulty,  which  the  popular  Evangelicalism  hardly 
did,  about  justifying  our  English  Reformation; 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  instead  of  helping  the 
cause  of  Rome,  it  in  reality  cut  away  the  ground 
from  under  her  feet.  **They  have  no  support  in 
the  Fathers,  sir.  In  the  first  three  centuries  not 
one  word."^    Thus  spoke,  in  his  stately  way,  Dr. 

iDean  Burgon's  Lives  of  Twelve  Good  Men,  "  Martin  Joseph  Routh,  the 
Learned  Divine  ",  vol.  i.  p.  $6, 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  213 

Routh,  by  far  the  most  learned  English  divine  of 
his  day,  concerning  the  Roman,  so  far  as  they 
differed  from  the  English,  Catholics.  Dr.  Routh, 
of  course,  never  threw  himself  into  the  movement 
(he  held  aloof  from  all  movements);  but  he  saw  its 
strength,  and,  in  spite  of  his  aloofness,  gave  its 
leaders  a  sort  of  dignified  support. 

(2)  The  revived  sense  of  beauty  in  all  depart- 
ments, which  is  popularly  termed  aestheticism,  was 
a  valuable  ally  to  the  movement.  It  was,  perhaps, 
fortunate  that  prominence  was  not  given  in  the 
early  stage  to  the  adjuncts  of  worship;  otherwise  it 
might  have  been  said  that  the  revival  was  merely 
the  ecclesiastical  form  which  aestheticism  took.  But 
dates  show  that  it  was  not  so.  The  principles  ad- 
vocated by  Keble,  Pusey,  and  Newman,  had  estab- 
lished themselves  before  the  aesthetic  wave  passed 
over  the  country.  We  were  still  in  the  reign  of 
ugliness;  but  when  that  reign  passed  away,  and  a 
sense  of  the  beautiful  in  architecture,  in  music,  in 
painting,  in  the  fine  arts  generally,  asserted  its 
sway,  it  found  its  natural  home,  so  far  as  religion 
was  concerned,  in  the  remodelled  church.  Men 
who  loved  beautiful  music  and  grand  surroundings 
in  their  worship  had  in  former  times  gone  to  Roman 
Catholic  chapels  in  order  to  find  them;  now  they 
need  not  cross  the  borders  of  their  own  church. 
Rome  could  no  longer  claim  a  monopoly  in  enlist- 
ing what  appealed  to  the  sense  of  beauty  into  the 
service  of  the  Almighty. 


214  The  Anglican  Revival. 

(3)  It  may  seem  to  be  attributing  too  much  im- 
portance to  a  comparatively  trifling  matter,  but  there 
is  no  doubt  that  very  great  influence  in  the  Anglican 
direction  was  exercised  by  the  vast  number  of  tales 
for  the  young  which  followed  in  the  wake  of  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times  in  rapid  succession.  Many  who 
would  never  have  dreamed  of  reading  the  Tracts 
read  with  aviditythe  tales  of  Dr.  Neale,  Mr.  Gresley, 
Mr.  Paget,  Miss  Sewell,  Miss  C.  M.  Yonge,  and 
Mr.  J.  W.  E.  Bennett;  while  the  allegories  of  Samuel 
Wilberforce,  William  Adams,  and  Edward  Monro, 
took  the  place  in  many  families  of  The  Pilgrim's 
Progress  and  The  Holy  War,  In  any  revival  it  is 
of  course  of  vital  importance  to  win  over  the  rising 
generation ;  otherwise  the  work  dies  out  with  the 
generation  that  dies  away.  But  it  was  especially 
important  in  this  revival,  which  in  the  first  instance 
was  the  reverse  of  a  popular  one.  The  writings  of 
its  first  leaders,  however  excellent,  were  **  caviare  to 
the  general  ".  Even  The  Christian  Year  (still  more 
The  Lyra  Innocentium)  demanded  a  much  greater 
effort  of  the  intellect  than  the  majority  are  willing 
to  give,  really  to  understand  it;  and  to  this  day  I 
believe  it  is  a  book  more  bought  and  quoted  than 
generally  read.  And  the  tales  in  question,  though 
adapted  and  intended  for  the  young,  were  not  at  all 
beneath  the  notice  of  grown-up  people,  who  are 
often  children  in  mind  when  they  are  no  longer 
children  in  years.  Indeed,  such  stories  as  The 
Siege  of  Lichfield^  The  Heir  of  Redely ffc^  A  my  Her- 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  215 

bert,  Shepperton  Manor^  The  Owlet  of  Owlstone 
Edge,  and  such  allegories  as  The  Rocky  Island,  The 
Slmdow  of  the  Cross,  and  The  Dark  River,  are  lit- 
erature which  the  most  learned  and  highly-culti- 
vated adults  need  not  be  ashamed  of  reading  and 
admiring;  and  a  vast  number  did  r^Sid  and  admire 
it,  while,  half-unconsciously  perhaps,  they  imbibed 
the  principles  of  the  writers. 

(4)  The  personal  characters  of  the  leaders  were  of 
a  kind  to  commend  any  cause  which  they  espoused 
to  the  respectful  consideration  of  the  pious  and  the 
thoughtful.  John  and  Thomas  Keble,  E.  B.  Pusey, 
J.  H.  Newman,  R.  H.  Froude,  Isaac  Williams, 
Charles  Marriott,  and  the  rest  were  all  men  of  a  very 
high  type,  morally,  spiritually,  and  intellectually. 
No  breath  of  scandal  ever  sullied  the  fair  fame  of 
any  one  of  them;  their  earnestness  and  sincerity 
were  not  denied  even  by  those  who  thought  that 
they  spent  their  lives  in  propagating  the  most 
mischievous  and  deadly  delusions.  They  were  all 
on  the  foundations  of  their  respective  colleges,  and 
were  therefore,  in  a  sense,  picked  men  to  begin 
with ;  and  there  they  were  trained  up  to  the  finest 
possible  point,  leading  one  another  upwards,  as 
young  trees  do  in  a  plantation.  It  is  wonderful 
also  what  kindliness,  forbearance,  and  consideration 
they  showed  one  towards  another.  They  were  men 
of  very  independent  minds,  and  were  by  no  means 
inclined  to  follow  one  after  the  other,  as  sheep  do 
when  they  go  through  a  hedge.     But  this  indepen- 


2i6  The  Anglican  Revival. 

dence  does  not  appear  to  have  in  the  least  interrupted 
the  harmony  of  their  joint  work.  It  was  not  * '  a  treble 
cord  ",  but  a  tenfold  or  a  twenty-fold  cord,  which, 
of  course,  was  '^  not  easily  broken '\  The  movement 
was  emphatically  one  which  began  at  the  top  and 
worked  downwards;  not  vice  versd.  And  this 
surely  is  the  right  order;  for  it  is  far  easier  and 
more  satisfactory  to  popularize  a  system  which 
has  an  intellectual  backbone,  than  it  is  to  give  an 
intellectual  backbone  to  a  system  which  begins  by 
being  popular  and  invertebrate. 

(5)  It  supplied  a  want  which  Evangelicalism 
supplied  in  its  day,  but  which  it  was  fast  failing 
to  satisfy.  The  Oxford  men  and  their  successors 
touched  life  at  far  more  points  than  the  older  Evan- 
gelicals ever  did.  To  quote  the  unimpeachable 
testimony  of  Principal  Tulloch,  who,  though  stand- 
ing apart  from  both,  might  certainly  be  expected  to 
sympathizefar  more  with  Low  than  with  High  church- 
men: **The  Evangelical  school,  with  all  its  merits, 
had  conceived  of  Christianity  rather  as  something 
superadded  to  the  highest  life  of  humanity,  than  as 
the  perfect  development  of  that  life;  as  a  scheme 
for  human  salvation  authenticated  by  miracles,  and, 
so  to  speak,  interpolated  into  human  history,  rather 
than  a  divine  philosophy.  Philosophy,  literature, 
art,  and  science  were  conceived  apart  from  religion. 
The  world  and  the  church  were  severed  portions 
of  life  divided  by  outward  signs  and  badges;  and 
those  who  joined  the  one  or  the  other  were  supposed 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  217 

to  be  clearly  marked  off."^  It  was  a  mischievous 
notion  to  go  abroad  that  piety  was  alienated  from 
the  higher  culture ;  but  it  certainly  was  a  very  prev- 
alent notion,  though  not  altogether  a  just  one,  at 
the  time  when  the  Oxford  movement  began.  And 
to  this  very  day,  while  we  can  admire  the  beautiful 
characters  of  the  early  Evangelicals,  we  cannot  read 
their  books.  But  the  Oxford  school,  unlike  the 
Evangelicals,  produced  a  literature  of  enduring 
merit;  and,  unlike  the  Broad  churchmen  and  the 
"establishment  men",  had  a  definite  system  to 
recommend.     For 

(6)  Another  cause  of  the  success  of  the  movement 
was  that  it  taught  men  to  realize  that  the  church 
could  give  them  something  worth  fighting  for. 
**  Liberty  of  thought"  on  the  one  hand,  and  *'  Our 
happy  establishment  in  Church  and  State  "  on  the 
other,  were  too  vague,  too  unspiritual  things  to 
kindle  enthusiasm ;  but  the  Holy  Catholic  Church 
was  not.  The  Evangelical  Revival  derived  its 
impetus  from  its  insistence  upon  the  necessity  of  the 
conversion  of  the  individual  sinner's  soul  to  God; 
the  Anglican  Revival,  from  its  insistence  upon  the 
supplementary,  not  contradictory,  truth  that  God's 
elect  "are  knit  together  in  one  communion  and 
fellowship  in  the  mystical  body  of  His  Son  ".  The 
one  was  the  triumph  of  individualism,  the  other,  of 
collectivism. 

•  Movenunts  of  Religious  Thought  in  Britain  during  the  Nineteenth 
Century,  p.  13. 


2i8  The  Anglican  Revival 

(7)  The  practical  work  in  the  parish,  in  the  diocese, 
and  in  the  church  at  large,  which  arose  out  of  the 
movement,  has  been  a  most  potent  cause  of  its  suc- 
cess. It  would  be  a  cruel  injustice  to  many  good  men, 
especially  those  of  the  Evangelical  school,  to  claim 
for  the  Anglican  Revival  an  exclusive  share  in  the 
vast  increase  both  in  the  amount  and  efficiency  of 
church  work  which  has  characterized  the  nineteenth 
century  as  compared  with  the  eighteenth.  On  the 
contrary,  in  many  dioceses  and  parishes  that  work 
was  in  full  swing  before  the  movement  commenced, 
and  in  still  more,  before  it  made  itself  felt.  But  that 
is  the  very  reason  why  its  practical  work  has  been  one 
of  the  chief  reasons  of  its  success.  It  had  not  to 
create  a  sense  of  the  necessity  of  such  work — that  was 
created  already ;  and  the  very  fact  that  it  existed  led 
to  the  keen  appreciation  of  what  the  revival  did  in 
the  domain  of  practice.  It  commended  itself  to  men 
who  could  not  enter  into  the  nice  distinctions  of 
theology  by  the  real  good  its  adherents  appeared  to 
be  doing.  And  moreover,  it  gave  a  certain  defin- 
iteness  and  system  to  the  work,  which  was  needed. 
In  such  dioceses  as  Oxford  under  Bishop  Wilber- 
force,  Salisbury  under  Bishops  Denison,  Hamilton, 
and  Moberley,  Lincoln  under  Bishop  Wordsworth, 
Lichfield  under  Bishop  Selwyn;  in  such  parishes 
as  Leeds  under  Dr.  Hook,  Wantage  under  Mr. 
Butler,  Kidderminster  under  Mr.  Claughton,  Yar- 
mouth under  Mr.  Hills,  Frome  under  Mr.  Bennett, 
you  trace  the  peculiar  stamp  of  the  revival  in  what 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  219 

was  done.  It  was  done  often  amidst  great  opposi- 
tion, but  that  very  opposition  called  attention  to  it,  and 
thus  really  helped  on  the  success  of  the  movement. 
It  is  wonderful,  again,  how  much  of  the  work  of 
the  church  at  large  during  the  last  fifty  years  is, 
directly  or  indirectly,  due  to  the  movement  we  are 
considering.  The  restoration,  after  much  discour- 
agement in  high  places,  of  the  active  powers  of 
Convocation,  the  establishment  of  the  less  regular, 
but  not  less  efficient,  Church  Congresses  and  Dio- 
cesan Conferences,  of  Sisterhoods,  of  Guilds,  of 
parochial  missions,  of  retreats  and  quiet  days;  the 
increase  of  the  episcopate  at  home  and  abroad,  the 
revival  of  the  office  of  (so-called)  Suffragan  Bishops, 
and  many  other  organizations,  may  fairly  be  said  to 
have  originated  with  men  who  were,  more  or  less,  in- 
fluenced by  the  movement ;  though  they  were  after- 
wards taken  up  by  others.  ^*  Nothing  succeeds  like 
success  ",  and  the  successful  carrying  out  of  such 
projects  in  detail,  materially  contributed  to  the  suc- 
cess of  the  movement  as  a  whole.  It  is  the  natural 
tendency  of  practical  workers  to  join  themselves  to 
that  body  in  which  practical  work  is  most  efficiently 
carried  out;  and  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  point 
out  many  instances  in  which  men  who  began  by 
having  no  sympathy  with  the  theoretical  side  of  the 
movement  have  been  gradually  drawn  into  it  by  its 
success  in  practical  work.  This  has  been  more 
especially  the  case  with  Broad  Churchmen,  who, 
having  never  formed  one  compact  body,  as  the  Evan- 


220  The  Anglican  Revival. 

gelicals   did,   have  in   numberless   cases   virtually 
identified  themselves  with  the  movement  party. 

(8)  It  was  a  revival  of  the  poetry  of  religion, 
which  had  well-nigh  died  out  at  the  commencement 
of  the  Georgian  era;  in  other  words  it  was,  as  Dr. 
Pusey  expressed  it,  ''a  return  to  the  seventeenth 
century".  A  singularly  prosaic  type  of  Christianity 
set  in  when  Tillotson  was  the  most  admired  of 
preachers,  and  Locke  the  most  influential  of  philo- 
sophers. The  type  was  intensified  in  the  days  of 
the  **  evidence  writers",  culminating  in  the  Paley 
school  of  divinity,  which  applied  the  utilitarian 
theory  of  Jeremy  Bentham  to  religion.  The  Evan- 
gelicals introduced  a  far  more  tender  and  spiritual 
element,  but  even  they  laid  so  much  stress  upon  the 
fear  of  future  punishment  and  the  hope  of  future 
reward  that  they  seemed  rather  to  extend  the  Ben- 
thamite principle  of  **the  greatest  happiness  of  the 
greatest  number"  to  another  world,  which  the  utili- 
tarians applied  to  this  world.  The  church  was  in- 
clined to  be  prosaic  and  commonplace  from  the  acces- 
sion of  the  first  George  up  to  the  commencement  of 
the  Oxford  movement.  There  were  very  few  whose 
religion  was  of  that  spirit  which  breathes  through 
every  page  of  our  Liturgy,  and  which  produced  such 
men  as  Lancelot  Andrewes,  Nicholas  Ferrar,  George 
Herbert,  Robert  Sanderson,  Thomas  Ken,  John 
Kettlewell,  George  Bull,  Simon  Patrick,  WiUiam 
Beveridge,  and  Robert  Nelson.  Here  and  there  an 
instance  like  that  of  William  Law  or  of  William 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  221 

Jones  of  Nayland  might  be  found,  but  these  were 
quite  exceptions ;  the  type  had  practically  died  out. 
The  difference  between  the  churchmen  of  the  later 
date  and  those  of  the  earlier  was  like  the  difference 
between  a  modern  prayer  and  an  ancient  one;  or 
between  an  old  Gothic  church  with  all  its  mellowed 
beauty  and  a  brand-new  town-hall  with  all  its  garish- 
ness.  The  latter  may  be  a  useful  edifice,  but  there 
is  no  poetry  about  it.  The  Anglican  revival  was  a 
return  to  the  old  type  reflected  in  the  Prayer  Book. 
It  caught  the  imagination,  it  supplied  a  refuge  for 
many  who  revolted  from  the  prosaic  spirit  of  the 
age. 

It  is  a  notable  fact  that  a  large  proportion  of  the 
men  who  have  been  prominent  in  the  movement 
have  been,  more  or  less,  gifted  with  the  spirit  of 
poetry.  It  has  been  seen  that  three  at  least  of  that 
brilliant  galaxy  which  lighted  up  the  firmament  in 
the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century — Coleridge, 
Wordsworth,  and  Sir  Walter  Scott — prepared  the 
way  for  the  movement.  And  of  the  few  who  took  a 
leading  part  in  the  movement  itself  in  its  early  stage, 
no  less  than  five — J.  Keble,  J.  H.  Newman,  I.  Wil- 
liams, J.  M.  Neale,  and  F.  W.  Faber — were  true  poets. 
Not  only  did  their  religion  affect  their  poetry,  but 
also  their  poetry  affected  their  religion  and  tended 
to  make  it  attractive.  What  was  once  said  in  a 
periodical,  which  cannot  be  accused  of  having  too 
ecclesiastical  proclivities,^  of  a  later  phase  of  the 

»  Th€  Pall  Mall  Gauttt. 


222  The  Anglican  Revival. 

movement,  is  at  least  as  true  of  the  earlier:  **It 
made  the  Church  of  England  interesting".  It  has 
been,  and  still  is,  a  standing  witness  and  a  valuable 
protest  against  the  utilitarian  philosophy  and  ram- 
pant industrialism  of  the  age.  The  Victorian  age 
has  been  termed  ''the  age  of  inventions",  and  we 
point  with  conscious  pride  to  our  railways,  our 
telegraphs,  our  telephones,  our  machinery,  our 
sanitary  arrangements,  our  manufactures,  as  proofs 
of  our  greatness.  But,  after  all,  there  is  another 
part  of  our  nature  which  the  utmost  perfection  of 
appliances  that  only  touch  the  material  life  cannot 
affect.  To  this  part  the  movement  appealed,  and 
it  did  not  appeal  in  vain;  it  is  a  remarkable  fact 
that  no  section  of  society  has  been  more  affected  by 
it  than  that  which  is  incessantly  occupied  in  work- 
shops, maniifactories,  and  such  like  places.  Hence 
it  is  that  it  has  been  more  successful  in  crowded 
centres  than  in  country  places :  in  the  latter  the 
clergy  have  generally  had  to  push  on  the  people;  in 
the  former  the  people  have  very  often  had  to  push 
on  the  clergy.  But  both  in  town  and  country  it  has 
supplied  a  want  which  mere  materialism  can  never 
satisfy;  for,  as  Matthew  Arnold  says  in  one  of  his 
prose  works,  the  human  mind  is  interested  in  higher 
questions  than  what  papier-mache  is,  and  how 
buttons  are  made. 

To  these  causes  the  adherents  of  the  movement 
would  of  course  add  another,  which  outweighs  them 
all — the  blessing  of  the  Almighty  upon   His  own 


Causes  of  the  Success  of  the  Movement.  223 

work,  the  carrying  out  of  the  principle  that  the 
Tnithr  is  mighty  and  will  prevail.  But  this  is 
trenching  upon  a  topic  which  belongs  to  the  theo- 
logian, not  to  the  historian.  The  task  of  the  latter 
is  ended  when  he  has  told,  as  faithfully  as  may  be, 
the  simple  story  of  what  friend  and  foe  must  own  to 
be  one  of  the  most  remarkable  and  influential  move- 
ments of  modern  times. 


Index. 


Adams,  Rev.  W.,  214. 
Address  to  the  Primate(i834),  49-sa 
iEstheticism  and  Worship,  213. 
Allegories  on  the  lines  of  the  Re- 
vival, 214. 
Allies.  Rev.  T.  W.,  182. 
All   Saints',  Margaret   Street,  201, 

205. 
Anderdon,  J.  D.,  176,  X77. 
Anglican  Claim,   The  (Wiseman), 

90. 
Apostolical    Succession,   The,    28, 

54-6,  60,  85. 
"  Apostolicals,  The",  56. 
Appeal  in  matters  of  doctrine  and 

ritual,  205. 
Appendix  to  Bp.  Jebb's  Sermons,  18. 
Arians,  History  of  the,  Newman's, 

45- 
Arnold,  Dr.,  of  Rugby,  71,  73,  92. 
Ashwell,  Canon,  162,  172. 
Assize  Sermon,  Keble's,  29-36. 
Association  of  the  Friends  of  the 

Church,  49-50,  53,  56. 

Badelcy,  E.  L.,  183. 
Bagot,  Bp.,  85-7,  89,  104,  1 13-3. 
Bailey,  Archdeacon,  198. 
Bampton  Lectures,  Hampden's,  71- 

2,  172. 
Bampton  Lectures,  Miller's,  27. 
Baptism,   Puseys  three  Tracts  on, 

63- 
Baptismal  Regeneration,  43,  173-4, 

177.  183- 
Baptistery,  The,  J.  Williams',  X9a 
Bennett,  Rev.  J.  W.  E. ,  204, 214,218. 
Bernard,  Mountaguc,  132. 
(M426) 


Blomfield,  Bp.  C.  J.,  162,  200,  204. 

Blunt,  Professor  J.  J.,  138. 

Bowden,  J.  W.,  86,  92. 

Boyce,  E.  J.,  191. 

British  Critic,  The,  90,  11 1-3,  137, 

179.  195-^.  197. 
British  Magazine,  The,  20,  68,  137, 

198. 
Burgon,  Dean  J. ,  19,  30. 
Butler,  Dean  W. ,  142,  218. 

Cambridge  Camden  Society,   139- 

142,  191. 
Cambridge — Evangelical     element 

in,  135-6. 
Cambridge — indirect    influence    on 

the  Revival,  143-5. 
Cambridge — its  share  in  the  Revival, 

135-145. 
Catena  Patrum,  Newman's,  77,  88. 
Cathedral,  The,  J.  Williams',  190. 
"Catholic  Emancipation  Act",  9. 
Choral  services,  192,  201. 
Christian  Observer,  The,  169. 
Christian  Remembrancer,   The,  46, 

129-130,  185.  196-7. 
Christian  Year,   Keble's,  24-7,  36, 

49,  97,  188,  214. 
Church,  Dean,  97,  128, 133, 185,210. 
Church  Building  Society,  10. 
Church  Congresses,  219. 
Church  History,   revived  study  of, 

212. 
Church  Missionary  Society,  10. 
Church  Quarterly  Review,  The,  142. 
Church  Restoration,  effects  of,  199- 

200. 
Church  Unions,  184-6. 

P 


226 


The  Anglican  Revival. 


Churton,  Archd.,  loo,  158,  174. 
"Clapham  Sect,  The",  13,  16, 
•'  Clapton  Sect,  The  ",  13,  16. 
Claughton,  Bp.,  218. 
Coleridge,  Sir  J.  T.,  102,  no. 
Coleridge,  S.  T.,  17,  221. 
Coloured  stoles,  200. 
Convocation  (Oxford),  72,  no. 
Convocation  (Provincial Synod),  219. 
Copeland,  Rev.  W.  J,,  58,  95. 
Copleston,   Bp.   (Provost  of  Oriel), 

43.  71- 
Corporation  Act,  9. 
Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford,  35. 
Court  of  Delegates,  206. 
Coventry,  Dr.  Hook  at,  149-150. 

"  Declaration  of  the  Laity"  (1834), 

So-i. 
Denison,  Bp.,  162,  218. 
Development  of  Doctrine^  Essay  on 

the,  Newman's,  118-9,  180. 
Diocesan  Conferences,  219. 
Dodsworth,  Rev.  W.,  i8i-2. 
Donatists,  the,  91. 
Dublin  Review,  The,  90. 

Ecclesiological  Society,   The,   191, 

192. 
Ecclesiologist,  The,  142,  191. 
Episcopate,  Increase  of  the,  219. 
Evangelical   Revival,  The,   11,   15, 

208,  217. 
Evangelicals.   The,    12,   41-2,    81, 

216-7,  220. 
Evans,  Archd.  R.  W.,  136. 

Faber,  Rev.  F.  W.,  221. 

Fabrics  of  churches  before  the  Re- 
vival, 196-7. 

Fasting,  Pusey's  Tract  on,  62,  121. 

Fathers,  Study  of  the,  23-4. 

Faussett,  Prof,  (Oxford),  107-8. 

Froude,  Archd.,  47,  50,  56-7. 

Froude,  R.  Hurrell,  21,  32,  44-5, 
47.  SO.  56.  56.  70-1.  215- 

Froude's  Remains,  81-3,  92. 

Garbett,  Archd.,  io6. 


German  Theology,  38-9,  40-1. 

Gilbert,  Bp.,  141. 

Gladstone.  Right  Hon.  W.  E.,  no, 

192,  202. 
Golightly,  Rev.  C.  P.,  58, 84,  93, 100. 
Gorham,  Rev.  G.  C,  173-4. 
Gorham    Judgment,    The,    173-4, 

180-4. 
Griffiths,  Rev.  J.,  100. 
Guardian,  The,  130-3. 
Guilds,  219. 

Haddan,  Rev.  A.  W. ,  131-2. 

Haddan,  T.  H.,  131. 

Hadleigh  Rectory,  meeting  at,  28-9, 

31-2. 
Hamilton,  Bp.  W.  K..  218. 
Hampden,  Bp.  R.  D.,  71-4,  106-7, 

108,  168-173. 
Hampden  Controversy,  The  (1836), 

71-4. 
Hampden  Controversy,  The  (1847), 

168-173. 
Hare,  Archd.  J.,  170. 
Harrison,  Archd.  B.,  84- 
Hawkins,  Dr.  E. ,  Provost  of  Oriel, 

108,  172. 
Hebdomadal  Board  (Oxford),  100-2, 

115. 
Herbert  of  Lea,  Lord,  205. 
Hills,  Bp.  G.,  218. 
Holy  Eucharist  as  a  Comfort  to  the 

Penitent,  Pusey's  Sermon  on  the, 

107. 
Hook,   Dean  W.  F.,  84,  85,  loi, 

147-161. 
Hope,   Rt.    Hon.  A.  J.  Beresford, 

142,  193-5,  201. 
Hope-Scott,  J.  R.,  182-3,  193-4. 
Host,  Prof.  F.  J.  A.,  143-4. 
Howley,  Abp.,  169,  179. 
Hursley,  188. 

Ideal  of  a  Christian  Church,   The 

(Ward),  113-5. 
Indian  Episcopate,  The,  10. 
Irish  Temporalities  Act  (1833),  28. 

Jebb,  Bp.  J.,  18,  149. 

Jelf,  Dr.  R.  W.,  100,  108,  158. 


Index. 


227 


Jenkyns,  Dr.  R.,  Master  of  Balliol, 

108. 
Jerusalem  Bishopric,  The,  91-a. 
Judicial  Committee  of    the    Privy 

Council,  206-7. 

Kaye,  Bp.  J.,  23-4,  138,  162. 

Keble,  Rev.  J.,  15,  17,  21,  24-7, 
29-31.  33-S.  45.  47-9. 64.  81-3.  84, 
86,  94,  96-8,  102,  122,  175,  184-5, 
188,  215,  221. 

Keble,  Rev.  T.,  58,  94,  215. 

King,  Rev.  Bryan,  201. 

Knox,  Alexander,  18. 

Law,  Rev.  W.,  98. 

Le  Bas,  Rev.  C.  W.,  137. 

Leeds,  Dr.  Hook  at,  150  etsey.,2iB. 

"  Letter  of  the  4  tutors"  (on  Tract 

90),  lOO-I. 
"  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford", 

Pusey's,  89. 
Liberalism  at  Oxford,  43,  44,  X17. 
Library  of  the  Fathers,  68-9,  88. 
Liddledale,  Dr.  R.,  140,  141 «. 
Liddon,  Canon  H.  P.,  206. 
Lightfoot,  Bp.  J.  B.,  143. 
Littlemore,  105,  116,  189-190. 
Lloyd,  Bp.  C,  21-2,  38,  39. 
Longley,  Abp.,  152,  153,  169. 
Lonsdale,  Bp.  J.,  162. 
Lowder,  Rev.  C.  F.,  201,  211. 
Lowe,  Rt.  Hon.  R.,  103. 
Lyra  Innocentiutn,  188,  2x4. 

Mackonochie,  Rev.  A.  H..  aoz.  an. 
Macmullen,    Rev.    R.    G.,    106-7, 

153-5.  156. 
Maltby,  Bp.  E.,  187. 
Manning,  Card.  H.  E..  175-181. 184. 
Margaret  Chapel,  services  at,  201-3. 
Marriott.  Rev.  C,  68,  74^.,  126-8, 

Martyrs'  Memorial  at  Oxford,  83-5. 

Maskell.  Rev.  W.,  181. 

Mill.  Dr.  W.  H.,  137. 

Miller,  Rev.  J, ,  27. 

Milnes,  Rt.  Hon.  Monckton,  xoa. 


Moberly,  Bp.  G.,  218,  228. 

Monk,  Dr.  W.  H.,  192. 

Monophysites,  The,  90. 

Monro,  Rev.  E.,  214. 

Motett  Society,  The,  192. 

Mozley,  Prof.  J.  B. ,  47, 69, 78,  ioa-3, 

109,  1x6,  128-X30. 
Mozley,  Rev.  T.,  19,  48,  59,  123. 
Mozley,  Mrs.  T.,  47. 
Mysticism,  Tract  89  on,  96-8. 

Narrative  of  Events,  &*c.,  Palmer's, 

X12-3. 
National  Society,  The,  la 
Neale,  Dr.  J.  M.,  X40-1,  X43,  X9X, 

214,  22X. 

Newman,  Card.  J.  H.,  2X,  4X-7, 
51-3.  65-7,  70,  72,  76-8,  81-3, 
85-7.  89-92,  93-s,  XXX-2,   XX6-9, 

215,  221. 
Noetics,  Oriel,  43,  71. 
Nonjurors,  The,  34,  X75. 
"No.  89"  (Tract),  96-7. 

"  No.  90"  (Tract),  9X,  97-X04,  XX5-6, 

x8o. 
Norris,  Rev.  H.  H.,  56,  X36. 

Oakeley,  Rev.  F.,  2x,  65, 66, 93,  x  11, 

201-3. 
Observations  on  Religious  Dissent, 

Hampden's,  72,  172. 
Odium  against  the  Church  (1832), 

9.  ". 
Ogilvie,  Prof.  C.  A.,  108. 
Optimism  in  Church  of  England,  X58. 
Oriel  College,  Oxford,  35,  43,  43, 

44,  71,  128. 
Origines  Liturgicee,  Palmer's,  22-3. 
"Orthodox,  The",  12,  13. 
Ouseley,  Sir  F.  G.,  X92. 
Oxford,  collapse  of  movement  at,  120. 
Oxford,  Diocese  of,  under  Wilber- 

force,  166,  218. 
Oxford,  Keble's  Assize  Sermon  at, 

29. 
Oxford.  Newman's  sermons  at  S. 

Mary's,  61. 
Oxford  after  Newman's  secession, 

121  ^/  seg. 


228 


The  Anglican  Revival. 


Oxford  as  a  proper  centre  of  move- 
ment (Newman),  52-3. 

Oxford  culture  seen  in  the  early 
movement,  134-5. 

Oxford  Architectural  Society,  igi. 

Oxford  Malignants,  The  (Arnold), 
73-4- 

Oxford  Movement,  The  (Church), 
133  and  passim. 

Paget,  Rev.  F.  E.,  214. 

Palmer,  Sir  W.  ("of  Worcester"), 

19,  22-3,  32-3,  SI,  S3,  SS>  56,  78-9. 

84,  87,  102,  iii-s,  123-4,  is8,  163. 
Palmer,  W.  ("of  Magdalen"),  6^n. 
Papal  Aggression,  The,  186-7. 
Parker,  J.  H.,  191. 
Parochial  Sermons,  Newman's, 60-1. 
Parry,  Gambier,  205. 
Pattison,  Rev.  Mark,  69. 
"Peculiars,  The",  159. 
Peel,  Sir  R.,  40. 
Perceval,  Rev.  Hon.  A.  P.,  28,  32-3, 

55.  I02- 
Pew  system,  191-2. 
Phillpotts,  Bp.  H.,  172,  173-4,  181. 
Pioneers  of  the  Revival,  16-27. 
Pius  IX.,  Pope,  186. 
Plain  Sermons  by   Writers  of  the 

Tracts  for  the  Times,  94. 
Poetry    Professorship    at    Oxford, 

105-6. 
Poetry  of  religion  revived,  220. 
Practical  work  of  the  Revival,  218-9. 
Prophetical  OJice  of  the  Church,  5fc., 

Newman's,  76. 
Psalmody  before  the  Revival,  197-9. 
Pusey,  Dr.  E.  B. ,  16,  21-2,  37-41, 

44,  62-70,  76,  84,  86,  89,  93,  94, 

102,  107-111,  121-5,  147-8,  152- 

161,  174,  185,  186,  188-9,  215. 
"  Puseyite",  The  term,  121. 

Rationalism  (German),  38-9. 

Record,  The,  170. 

Reform  Bill  (1832),  9. 

Reserve  in  Communicating  Religious 

Knowledge,  J.  Williamson,  79-81, 

96. 


Retreats  and  Quiet  Days,  219. 

Richards,  Rev.  Upton,  202,  203. 

Rogers,  F.  (Lord  Blachford),  83,  95, 
132-3,  189,  210. 

Roman  Controversy,  The,  74-8  and 
passim. 

Romanizing  party  in  the  movement, 
III  et  seq. 

Rose,  Rev.  H.  J.,  18-21,  28.  31-2, 
51.  55.  75.  137- 

Routh,  Dr.  M.,  President  of  Mag- 
dalen, 64,  103,  212-3. 

Royal  supremacy,  Pusey  on  the,  185. 

Russell,  Earl,  168,  187. 


S.  Alban's,  Holbom,  205,  210. 

S.  Andrew's,  Wells  Street,  205. 

S.  Barnabas,  Pimlico,  192,  204,  2ia 

S.  George's  in  the  East,  201,  210. 

S.  Mary  Magdalene,  Munster  Square, 
205. 

S.  Matthias',  Stoke  Newington,  192. 

S.  Paul's  Cathedral,  205. 

S.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  204. 

S.  Peter's,  London  Docks,  211. 

S.  Saviour's,  Leeds,  152-157. 

S.  Thomas',  Oxford,  205. 

Sale,  Canon,  58. 

Sargent,  Rev.  J.,  178. 

Scholastic  Philosophy,  Hampden  on, 
71. 

Scott,  Sir  Walter,  16,  221. 

Scott,  Rev.  W.  (of  Hoxton),  129, 
130. 

Secular  Courts,  206-7. 

Sel  borne.  Earl  of,  124. 

Selwyn,  Bp.  G.  A.,  218. 

Sewell,  Miss,  214. 

Sharp,  Martin,  132. 

Sisterhoods.  174,  182,  219. 

Society  for  Propagation  of  the  Gos- 
pel, 10. 

Stanley,  Dean  A.  P.,  74«.,  92. 

State  of  Religious  Parties,  Newman's 
Art.  on,  90. 

Suffragan  Bishops,  219. 

Sumner,  Abp.  J.  B.,  162. 

Sumner,  Bp.  C,  141,  162,  165. 


Index. 


229 


Sumner's  Treatise  on  Apostolical 
Preaching,  43. 

Surplice  Riots,  200. 

Symons,  Dr.  B.  P.,  Warden  of  Wad- 
ham,  108. 

Tait,  Abp.  A.  C,  loa 

Tales  for  the  young  on  the  lines  of 

the  Revival,  214. 
Test  Act,  9. 
Theological    Society    founded    by 

Pusey,  67-8. 
Theophilus     Anglicanus     (Words- 
worth), 138-9. 
Thirty-nine  Articles,    New-man   on 

the,  98-101. 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  Ward  on  the, 

1 14-5. 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  51-^,  62,  68, 

71,  74-5,  97,  104.  107,  and  passim. 
Treatise  on  the   Church  of  Christ 

(Palmer),  78-9. 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  136-7. 
Trinity  College,  Oxford,  43,  105. 
Tullocb,  Principal,  216. 

Utilitarianism,  The  Revival  a  protest 
against,  220,  222. 

Via  Media,  Newman's,  77-8,  89, 
90-1. 


"Wagner  Churches"  at  Brighton, 
205. 

Ward,  Rev.  W.  G,,  92-3,  102,  108, 
III,  113-6. 

Watson,  Joshua,  16,  51,  136,  174. 

Webb,  Rev.  B.,  142,  191. 

Westcott,  Bp.,  143. 

Whately,  Abp.,  43-4,  59,  71. 

Wilberforce,  Archd.  R.  }.,  44,  166, 
180,  184. 

Wilberforce,  Rev.  Henry,  182,  184. 

Wilberforce,  Bp.  S.,  74».,  84,  85, 
161-7,  171-3,  214. 

Wilberforce,  William,  165. 

WiUiams,  Rev.  Isaac,  21,  37,  79-81, 
90,  94-5,  105-6,  190,  215 

Wilson,  Rev.  H.  B.,  100. 

Wiseman,  Card.,  75,  186. 

Wordsworth,  Bp.  Charles,  176. 

Wordsworth,  Bp,  Christopher,  130, 
137.  138-9.  194-5.  218. 

Wordsworth,  Dr.  Christopher,  Mas- 
ter of  Trinity,  17,  136,  221. 

Wordsworth,  William,  poet,  17, 136, 
221. 

Worship  in  Church  of  England  be- 
fore the  Revival,  192-5,  197-9. 

Wynter,  Dr.,  President  of  St.  John's, 
108. 

Yonge,  Miss  C.  M.,  214. 


niNTBD  BY   BLACK  IE  AND  SON     LIMITED,  GLASGOW. 


^ 


^ 


x'^ 


-<= 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  Vf^ICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


4Nov'62GH 


^•i^-mSj^ 


IN  STACKS  _,  ^  ^^ 

DEC  awZftpb6''66-&pM 


JflN23  19S7e^ 


REC'D  LD 


DEC    3  1962 


RECEIVED 


2lMar'63.[M 


JAN  2  3 '67 -10  AM 


LOAN  DEPT. 


Rsc-P  LP     ;i^^^  ||  ^ 


MD^^  ^^ 


\%e> 


^kn: 


LOAN 


MUm 


^UG  1  8    l.qfic 


REC'D  LD 


■lilN7    '64^5  PM 


LD  21A-50m-3,'62 
(C70978lO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


ytJ  ^jufo 


248933 


^-.^z-  >1 


^*       ^         •'.         >r 


'-:.v^ 


